During the planning last year and the campaign ahead of the Punjab Assembly election, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) promised a sum of Rs. 1,000 per month to every woman in the State. To drive home the generosity of the promise, the AAP leader and Delhi Chief Minister, Arvind Kejriwal, emphasised that under AAP’s ‘Mission Punjab’ for the Punjab polls 2022, if there were three adult women in a household (daughter-in-law, daughter, mother-in-law), each of them would get Rs. 1,000. When questioned how Punjab, already reeling under heavy debt, could afford this, Mr. Kejriwal said something to the effect that if there is good political management, money would not be a problem.
Growing freebie culture
Electoral promises of this kind raise several questions. Is borrowing and spending on freebies sustainable? Is this the best possible use of public money? What is their opportunity cost — what is it that the public are collectively giving up so that the government can fund these payments? Should not there be some checks on how much can be spent on them?
I am using Punjab to illustrate a point and by no means to suggest that it is unique. In fact, many States are pursuing the freebie culture, some even more aggressively than Punjab.
Ideally, governments should use borrowed money to invest in physical and social infrastructure that will generate higher growth, and thereby higher revenues in the future so that the debt pays for itself. On the other hand, if governments spend the loan money on populist giveaways that generate no additional revenue, the growing debt burden will eventually implode and end in tears.
Concerned by an increasing number of States that are embarking on this financially ruinous path, senior bureaucrats reportedly flagged the issue at a meeting with the Prime Minister, telling him that ‘some States might go down the Sri Lankan way’.
There is an argument that this concern is being exaggerated. After all, if you look at any analysis of State Budgets by the Reserve Bank of India or any think tank, the inference you will draw is that State finances are in good, if indeed robust, health, and that all of them are scrupulously conforming to the Fiscal Responsibility and Budget Management (FRBM) targets.
This is a misleading picture. Much of the borrowing that funds these freebies happens off budget, beyond the pale of FRBM tracking. The typicalmodus operandi for States has been to borrow on the books of their public enterprises, in some cases by pledging future revenues of the State as guarantee. Effectively, the burden of debt is on the State exchequer, albeit well concealed. The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) had in fact pointed out that in respect of some States ‘if extra-budgetary borrowings are taken into account, the liabilities of the government are way above what is acknowledged in the official books’.
How big is the problem? There is no comprehensive information in the public domain to assess the size of this off-budget debt, but anecdotal evidence suggests that it is comparable in size to the debt admitted in the Budget books.
The obvious motivation for States in expanding freebies is to use the exchequer to build vote banks. A certain amount of spending on transfer payments to provide safety nets to the most vulnerable segments of the population is not only desirable but even necessary. The problem arises when such transfer payments become the main plank of discretionary expenditure, the spending is financed by debt, and the debt is concealed to circumvent the FRBM targets.
The more States spend on transfer payments, the less they have for spending on physical infrastructure such as, for example, power and roads, and on social infrastructure such as education and health, which can potentially improve growth and generate jobs. The truth of the Chinese saying, ‘give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime’ is self-evident to everyone, including politicians. But electoral calculations tempt them to place short-term gains ahead of long-term sustainability.
Institutional checks, balances
What about the institutional checks and balances that should prevent this downward spiral? Unfortunately, all of them have become ineffective. In theory, the first line of defence has to be the legislature, in particular the Opposition, whose responsibility it is to keep the Government in line. But given the perils of our vigorous democracy, the Opposition does not dare speak up for fear of forfeiting vote banks that are at the end of these freebies.
Another constitutional check is the CAG audit which should enforce transparency and accountability. In practice, it has lost its teeth since audit reports necessarily come with a lag, by when political interest has typically shifted to other hot button issues. Besides, our bureaucracy has mastered the fine art of turning audit paras into ‘files’ which run their course and die a quiet death.
The market is another potential check. It can signal the health or otherwise of State finances by pricing the loans floated by different State governments differently, reflecting their debt sustainability. But in practice this too fails since the market perceives all State borrowing as implicitly guaranteed by the Centre, never mind that there is no such guarantee in reality.
The costs can be huge
The costs of fiscal profligacy at the State level can be huge. The amount States borrow collectively every year is comparable in size to the Centre’s borrowing which implies that their fiscal stance has as much impact on our macroeconomic stability as does that of the Centre. The need, therefore, for instituting more effective checks that can make wayward States fall in line is compelling.
Here are two suggestions towards that end.
First, the FRBM Acts of the Centre as well as States need to be amended to enforce a more complete disclosure of the liabilities on their exchequers. Even under the current FRBM provisions, governments are mandated to disclose their contingent liabilities, but that disclosure is restricted to liabilities for which they have extended an explicit guarantee. The provision should be expanded to cover all liabilities whose servicing obligation falls on the Budget, or could potentially fall on the Budget, regardless of any guarantee.
Second, under the Constitution, States are required to take the Centre’s permission when they borrow. The Centre should not hesitate to impose conditionalities on wayward States when it accords such a permission. States slapped with conditionalities will of course baulk and allege political motives. The challenge for the Centre will be to act transparently and in accordance with well-defined, objective and contestable criteria.
Finally, there is the draconian provision in the Constitution of India which allows the President to declare financial emergency in any State if s/he is satisfied that financial stability is threatened. This Brahmastra has never been invoked so far for fear that this will turn into a political weapon of mass destruction. But the provision is there in the Constitution for a reason. After all, the root cause of fiscal irresponsibility is the lure of electoral nirvana. It will stop only if the political leadership fears punishment. It is therefore important to ensure that the prospect of a financial emergency in case of gross and continuing fiscal irresponsibility is not just an abstract threat but a realistic one.
Disappointingly, the Centre itself has not been a beacon of virtue when it comes to fiscal responsibility and transparency. To its credit, it has embarked on course correction over the last few years. It should complete that task in order to command the moral authority to enforce good fiscal behaviour on the part of States.
Duvvuri Subbarao was Finance Secretary to the Government of India and Governor, Reserve Bank of India
Higher education policy planners and regulators are busy giving shape to the digital university, which was announced in the 2022-23 Union Budget. Though still on the drawing board, the digital university is expected to offer any number, kind, and type of course without limits on intake, in a hybrid or ‘physical plus digital’ mode. It proclaims to provide equitable access to quality higher education and employability-enhancing skill development programmes to all.
Recent developments
In the interim, the University Grants Commission has relaxed the norms and standards for setting up open universities. In particular, land requirement has been reduced from 40 acres to just five acres. This is likely to open the floodgates for private open universities. Simultaneously, more universities are being enabled to offer courses in the distance, open and online mode, mostly in collaboration with EdTech startups and unicorns. Some have already outsourced the delivery of their courses to such agencies. Students are also made to complete a certain portion of their course requirements through Massive Open Online Courses. Additionally, they can accumulate credits at will and deposit them in their Academic Bank of Credit to be exchanged for a degree at a later stage. Higher education in India is getting metamorphosed into ‘hire education’. In the process, higher education is now getting delivered by for-profit entities, in contravention of the long-held belief that education at all levels must be provided on a not-for-profit basis.
The idea of providing higher educational opportunities in a non-formal mode is not new. Most mainstream universities in India have been allowing students, particularly women and working people, to learn on their own and take university exams as private candidates. Many have performed quite well.
The mode and medium of remote learning have, however, been changing to keep pace with technological advancement. Broadcasts and telecasts were once regarded as game changers to impart education remotely. They were espoused to be the cheapest way of enhancing access to quality education. The realities belied these expectations.
Information Communication and Entertainment technologies, augmented and virtual realities, artificial intelligence and machine learning are being touted as technologies with immense possibilities for transforming the delivery of education. The higher education horizon appears densely dotted with EdTech startups and tech companies as higher education aggregators.
Technology-enabled and mediated digital learning is projected as the future of higher education. Such learning is supposed to end face-to-face formal education — so much so that some have already started writing the obituary of the brick-and-mortar universities. Two years of COVID-19-compelled online education seems to have convinced them that in future, education, particularly higher education, will transform into a virtual space.
Evidence of massive learning losses due to the digital divide, but primarily due to the inherent limitations of technology, are being regarded as mere teething troubles. Sold to the idea, policy planners and regulators are aggressively pushing the distance, open, virtual, and online modes of education.
The EdTechs and technology companies are euphoric about these developments. The media is already abuzz with EdTechs raising resources and enhancing capacities to capitalise on the opportunities that these market-friendly reforms throw up. How successful and effective would such programmes be? No one knows. Going by the evidence, employers across the world are generally negatively disposed towards this. Most recruiters prefer to hire those who have graduated in face-to-face mode.
No wonder even the strongest proponents of online and virtual education feel that such programmes be subjected to stricter oversight, tighter regulations, and rigorous processes to ensure high standards and robust quality control. Given the fact that the quality of higher education is inversely proportional to the intensity of regulation, designing and developing an efficient and effective regulatory mechanism often proves more challenging than imagined.
The open and distance mode of learning, including the latest model based on digital and virtual delivery, often finds favour with the government due to cost considerations. It is, however, wrong to assume that these are economical and cost-effective. To be effective, they not only require massive capital investment in infrastructure, but also demand a significantly higher recurring expenses on content development and their continuous updating and upgradation.
No substitute for teachers
Digital delivery and technology integration in education may undoubtedly serve a useful purpose. Higher education must indeed embrace and keep pace with the advancements in technology. Technology can be effectively leveraged as a quality-enhancement tool. It would, however, be a blunder to regard technology-mediated teaching-learning as an alternative to face-to-face education. Technology can supplement and not substitute teachers.
No world-class universities, including those with a high degree of technology integration in their teaching and learning processes, are planning to cut down their faculty cost or their number any time soon. On the contrary, they envision hiring more of them to attain greater excellence. India cannot be an exception to this. Higher education is a lot more than borrowing content and delivering them online or outsourcing content. This would render India a consumer of knowledge. We must, instead, be focussed on exploiting our full potential to emerge as a producer of knowledge and providers of the global workforce.
Furqan Qamar is a former Adviser (Education) in the Planning Commission. Views are personal
Israel is to call for yet another national election, its fifth since 2019, as Naftali Bennett’s coalition government has ended abruptly. Israel’s Foreign Minister, Yair Lapid, has succeeded him as the caretaker Prime Minister and Israel is to go to the polls in either October or November 2022. In April, Mr. Bennett had planned to travel to India to celebrate 30 years of diplomatic relations between the two countries. His visit was cancelled at the last minute due to the rise in terror attacks in Israel and the crisis of a failing coalition.
Domestic polarisation
In the scene of a rapidly changing domestic politics, Naftali Bennett and his right-wing members were constantly targeted by Opposition leaders such as Benjamin Netanyahu for having an alliance with an Arab party and giving work permits to the Palestinians from Gaza. The coalition whip, Idit Silam, left the government in April and said this government has not been Jewish enough or loyal to the right-wing constituencies. Accommodation of ideological differences was rejected; ideological compromise was seen as weakening the state of Israel. Mr Bennett could not create unity in diversity and offered to step down.
Mr. Bennett gave his ‘exit statement’ toThe New York Times columnist, Bret Stephens (“Naftali Bennett’s Exit Interview”) who reported their telephone conversation; the first thing Mr Bennett said in the interview was: “In a world where domestic polarization is becoming almost the single biggest challenge, the experiment succeeded (the fact that his government was in power for one year and showed that there is an alternative to hardline leaders such as Netanyahu)”. His experiment was putting together a diverse coalition of eight odd parties together with his friend and partner, Yair Lapid. They were called ‘agents of change’.
This coalition spelt exceptional change in domestic Israeli politics as it had Ministers and the parliamentary unity of the right, centre, left. For the first time, there was an Arab party as well. A year ago, while making his first speech in Parliament, Mr. Bennett said, “I am proud of the ability to sit together with people with very different views than mine.” He invited all his ideological opponents to join the government with the realisation that Israeli society and politics have become too divided, toxic, and violently radical. He worried for national unity and knew Israel is threatened from within — divisions across the right and the left, religious and secular and Mirahim (oriental Jews) and Ashkanazim (European Jews) have caused political instability for too long. The forecast for the next national election is also worrisome as no political party, including Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud, is likely to get a majority of its own according to the pollsters.
Spoiler leader
Mr. Netanyahu was one of the factors behind the formation of the coalition; he has also helped in its failure. Otherwise, ideologically divided parties were compelled to come together by the logic of ‘anyone but Netanyahu’ and give Mr. Bennett a historic opportunity. Mr. Netanyahu, as the Opposition leader, ensured this would not last for long. Despite him being indicted for corruption charges and a trial he did not leave any stone unturned in Parliament to oppose the government. It was nothing less than an audacious decision on his part to oppose the bill extending Israeli laws in the West Bank last week that brought down the Bennett government. Mr. Netanyahu said to Ms. Silam who defected, “Idit, you’re proof that what guides you is the concern for the Jewish identity of Israel, the concern for the land of Israel, and I welcome you back home to the national camp. I call on all those elected by the national camp to join Idit and come home. You will be welcomed with complete respect and with open arms.”
Mr. Netanyahu, the orator of rhetoric in Israeli politics, has been sharp in his attacks on this government for having an Arab party (labelled as the ‘terror supporters’) and left parties (labelled as anti-national because of their support for the peace process and two-state solution with the Palestinians). In short, Mr. Bennett lost the battle of narratives even when he meant sinceretikkun (the Hebrew word for repair) of Israel’s internal divisions with moderation and compromises.
It is the right-wing politicians, of Mr. Bennett’s own party, who felt they have been making too many compromises and now need to revive their radical positions to uphold macho-nationalist, ultra-religious constituencies where a compromise of core principles is not rewarded. Whether this is true or merely an assumption will be known after the fresh elections. For now, Israeli domestic politics is becoming too polarised. Mr. Bennett still thinks that the new government that will come will have to build consensus and agree to compromise because no one is going to get a majority (61 out of 120 seats) in Parliament.
The road ahead
Henry Kissinger once said that Israel does not have a foreign policy but domestic politics. Israel is a house that is constantly in chaos; domestic issues overpower leaders so much that Israel fails to have long-drawn pro-active foreign policy. As a small state, Israel is inward-looking and parochial.
The Times of Israel has reported that “Bennett said he should have focused more on managing his own party and domestic politics while he was prime minister, and less on making progress with international leaders including Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky and the United Arab Emirates’ Mohamed bin Zayed”.
Mr. Bennett has attempted to mediate between Russia and Ukraine when the conflict between them started. Israel has also signed a Free Trade Agreement with the United Arab Emirates (UAE) which is a historical development considering the amount of regional isolation Israel has had to endure. There is a new chapter opening in Israel-Turkey relations. There is a buzz with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan as well. Next month, the United States President, Joe Biden, is making his first trip to Israel and there is a scheduled joint summit level meeting of the Middle East Quad (now called I2U2, or India, Israel, the U.S. and the UAE). So, not only is a celebration of 30 years of India-Israel relations awaiting a stable Israeli government but there are also other very significant geo-political changes.
Khinvraj Jangid is Associate Professor and Director of the Center for Israel Studies, Jindal School of International Affairs at the O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat. He is currently Adjunct Professor at the Ben-Gurion Research Institute for the Study of Israel and Zionism, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
Prime Minister Narendra Modi is attending two summits this week – he is a ‘special invitee’ at the 48th G7 Summit at Schloss Elmou in Germany. After that, he has a bilateral summit in Abu Dhabi with the UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al-Nahyan on June 28. Though the pundits may consider the second event as a sideshow, some statistics are enough to prove them wrong.
If the U.S. is exempted, no G7 country comes close to the UAE as India’s trading partner, exports market, Indian diaspora base and their inward remittances. According to our official Foreign Direct Investment data, the UAE invested more in India in 2021 than Germany and France combined. Unlike the UAE, none of the G7 countries has yet signed a bilateral Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (CEPA) with India.
Both summits are important to India, but unlike the interlocutors in the Bavarian Alps, our Prime Minister is unlikely to be hectored in Abu Dhabi about where not to buy oil from or how much Indian wheat and sugar must be sold. The agenda is likely to be more constructive and benign.
India-UAE synergy
The current India-UAE synergy and amity are largely due to Prime Minister Modi’s tending. This would be his fourth visit to Abu Dhabi and sixth summit with Sheikh Mohammed over the past seven years. These have re-energised this historic, but long-dormant, relationship. The visits have plenty to show — from Emirati investments in Jammu and Kashmir to a CEPA. After a COVID-19-induced three-year hiatus, a Modi-Sheikh Mohammed summit was desirable to infuse a fresh momentum.
In protocol terms, Mr. Modi would commiserate the passing away of UAE President Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed on May 13 and the appointment of Sheikh Mohammed, 61, as his successor. As Sheikh Mohammed has been the de facto President since Sheikh Khalifa suffered a stroke in 2014, the change at the helms means little in the practical term. However, this being the only second transition at the top since the formation of the UAE in 1971, it is significant. It symbolises political stability and continuity in a turbulence-prone region. Mr. Modi would probably be the first non-Arab leader to be received in Abu Dhabi after the 40-day State mourning ended on June 22. Thus, the Abu Dhabi summit would be a useful opportunity to recalibrate the bilateral ties and open new vistas following the operationalisation of the bilateral CEPA from May 1.
Changes since the pandemic
Significant changes in the bilateral, regional and global context have taken place since the two leaders last met in August 2019. Both countries have successfully contained the COVID-19 pandemic and can pool their experiences. Their bilateral trade grew by 68% in 2021-22 to $72.9 billion, a new record. While both exports and imports grew, the trade deficit reached $16.8 billion, also a new record. Thanks to the CEPA, the robust economic revival, higher oil prices and larger Indian imports, trade is likely to grow even higher in 2022-23. The corrective mechanism built into CEPA would, hopefully, prevent the deficit from going out of hand. As the UAE collects petrodollars, India, the world’s fastest-growing major economy, could be a lucrative market for investments in areas such as petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, renewables, infrastructure, manufacturing, logistics, start-ups, etc. A lot has already been done to streamline the manpower sector, including skilling the young Indian labour force to suit the Emirati requirements, but more can be done. The two sides can collaborate for the eventual reconstruction of the war-ravaged regional countries such as Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. In the bilateral political domain, the two sides have cooperated efficiently on security and anti-terrorism, but they need to do more to fight money laundering and the flow of illicit narcotics.
A complex area
The South West Asian region is a complex and evolving area. The UAE has disrupted the longstanding Arab Israeli stalemate by normalising relations with Israel in 2020. The two sides have recently signed a bilateral CEPA. After pursuing a muscular regional foreign policy against political Islam and in regional hotspots such as Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, and Somalia, Abu Dhabi seems to have decided to stage a phased withdrawal and improve ties with Syria, Qatar and Turkey. The ties with Saudi Arabia remain somewhat edgy, due to policy divergences and economic competition. Similarly, Abu Dhabi has developed some ruction with the Biden presidency in the U.S. and is diversifying its strategic options with Russia and China. It has conspicuously ignored the plea by the U.S. and other Western countries to raise its oil production. India, the UAE’s second-largest trading partner, and largest source of tourists and manpower, can be a useful ally.
Against this ongoing regional and global flux, the India-UAE summit is both topical and opportune and can have an impact beyond the bilateral context.
Mahesh Sachdev, a former Indian Ambassador, is President, Eco-Diplomacy and Strategies, New Delhi
Wimbledon is a tournament apart. It is delightfully anachronistic in that it is played on pristine grass courts, a throwback to the era when the sport was still called ‘lawn tennis’. Star players, who otherwise resemble walking billboards, are required to be reticent and don spotless white attire, resonating with the tournament’s strict policy of keeping the site relatively free of commercial sponsorships. Until 2021, the tournament even had a ‘Middle Sunday’ holiday, an out-of-place idea in the era of mega television deals and ambush marketing. And such is the event’s magnetic pull that even the biggest crisis to hit tennis in recent times — of Wimbledon barring Russian and Belarusian players against the backdrop of the Russia-Ukraine war and the ATP and WTA retaliating by removing ranking points — did not turn into a smoky inferno. Rafael Nadal, who three weeks ago won his 14th French Open and a record-extending 22nd Grand Slam title literally on one leg, is set to feature after undergoing radiofrequency treatment. Seven-time singles champion Serena Williams has come out of a year-long semi-retirement. Roger Federer’s grass-court majesty will be missed — for the first time since 1998 — but such is sport’s uncanny knack to replenish itself that there will be enough verdant pomp and splendour as the iconic Centre Court celebrates its centenary year.
Nadal and three-time defending champion Novak Djokovic will be the biggest men’s drawcards, along with eighth seed Matteo Berrettini who is seemingly back to his best after recovering from a hand injury. The absence of the top-two ranked men in Daniil Medvedev (barred) and Alexander Zverev (injured) is unfortunate, but the farthest they had progressed at SW19 was fourth round. Nadal, who is halfway towards an improbable Grand Slam (winning all four Majors in a single year), can be a handful, if he survives the first week when the grass is still lush and the bounce low and skiddy. Djokovic will be desperate to add to his 20 Slam titles and avoid the rare scenario where he would not be the reigning champion at any of the four Majors. Berrettini comes in with a grass-court win-loss record of 20-1 since Wimbledon 2019, including two titles at Queen’s Club, one at Stuttgart and a final at Wimbledon 2021. Among women, after the retirement of defending champion Ash Barty, Iga Swiatek has established herself as the numero uno. Grass is admittedly the Pole’s weaker surface and there is a closely bunched group with established credentials comprising Serena, Petra Kvitova, Garbine Muguruza, Simona Halep and Angelique Kerber. But Swiatek’s splendid recent form — six titles including Roland-Garros and 35 consecutive match-wins on hard and clay — means she will not be short on confidence even without the specific skillsets demanded by grass courts.
The outcomes in three Lok Sabha constituencies, one in Punjab and two in Uttar Pradesh, make significant political points, unusual for such routine bypolls. AAP faced a major setback in Punjab as it lost its bastion Sangrur, which was vacated by Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann who had won it in 2014 and 2019. The party’s Assembly victory in Punjab was seen as validation of its national ambitions, but Sunday’s setback must serve as a reality check. If anything, AAP’s performance in Punjab in the last three months, far from proving its capacity to be a national party, has only raised several questions. As it turned out, the Opposition — the Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD), SAD (Amritsar), the Congress and the BJP — all fighting separately, made the point on the gap between AAP’s promise and delivery; and between its claims and capacity. In Punjab, a State with its finances in a shambles and its bureaucracy and the police a law unto themselves, the inexperienced band of activists that came to power is caught in a bind. Mr. Mann also faces the charge of being remote-controlled from Delhi by party chief Arvind Kejriwal. The winner, Simranjit Singh Mann of the SAD (Amritsar), made Sangrur as significant as the loser did. He is a vociferous supporter of Khalistan and an ardent follower of Bhindranwale, who spearheaded the violent, terrorist separatism of the 1980s. His victory, and the complete emaciation of the Congress, the SAD and the BJP, signals the dangerous crossroads Punjab is at.
In U.P., the BJP’s victories in Rampur and Azamgarh prove the continuing potency of the party in the heartland. Azamgarh was vacated by SP chief Akhilesh Yadav, who chose to retain the Assembly seat that he won while the party lost a second consecutive time. Rampur was vacated by senior party leader Azam Khan, who will retain his Assembly seat. That such strongholds have slipped out of its hands is further proof that the SP’s hopes of a return in U.P. may be unrealistic, and its style, character and personnel are unacceptable to large sections of the voters. While the U.P. results make the BJP’s position unassailable, they also open new possibilities in the Opposition space as the SP’s slide continues. In the Atmakur Assembly segment in Andhra Pradesh, Chief Minister Jaganmohan Reddy’s YSRCP scored an impressive victory, while a victory each in Tripura and Jharkhand made the day for the Congress. The CPI(M) continued to sink in Tripura, its former stronghold. In Delhi, AAP retained the Rajinder Nagar Assembly seat, but that is little solace for the party that lost its representation in the Lok Sabha entirely. Overall, the bypoll outcomes underscore the continuing dominance of the BJP, and the continuing inability of the Opposition to rise to the challenge.
Last Tuesday, a three-member gang barged into Neendakara Taluk hospital in Kollam district of Kerala and attacked the hospital staff and security personnel with iron rods. This was in retaliation to an altercation between one of the accused and the health workers days earlier. In response to the attack, the hospital staff and medical fraternity went on strike. The police have arrested the members of the gang. However, healthcare workers remain restive since at least 12 such major incidents have been reported in the last one year besides the attacks against doctors that take place almost on a regular basis.
This has caught the attention of the Kerala High Court. While adjudicating on the case, the court directed the authorities to devise a clear plan of action so that hospitals, especially in remote areas, are provided police protection at night and healthcare workers are able to work without fear. It also asked the government to revert on the crowd-control measures it plans to take to enable healthcare workers to do their work without stress.
This is not the first time that the High Court is intervening on behalf of doctors. Last week, the court had refused to grant anticipatory bail to a man accused of obstructing a doctor, pointing out that even an obstruction or hindrance committed on a healthcare person is a grave offence as per the law.
At the heart of the issue is the fact that the State’s public sector hospitals are mostly understaffed. In a casualty ward, sometimes one doctor is forced to take care of 250-300 patients. As a consequence, dissatisfied patients are not a rarity. Doctors working in late evening shifts are the most vulnerable as they often have to deal with those with criminal backgrounds or people coming in an inebriated state. Overcrowding and the lack of competent security arrangements often aggravate the situation.
After one major incident last August, the government had issued orders that CCTV cameras be installed at casualty wings and OPD counters and that such cameras be linked to police aid posts.
The Kerala Health Service Persons and Healthcare Services Institutions (Prevention of Violence and Damage to Property) Act 2012 has not been a deterrent to these incidents despite its stringent provisions. Doctors say local politicians put pressure on the police not to file cases under the Act, as local people are often involved in such incidents. The police are accused of allowing offenders to abscond or file fake counter cases against doctors.
The deeper problem is the breakdown of trust between people and the medical community. The advancements in health technology and medical diagnostics have improved patient safety, but somehow the message that not all medical complications are due to human error has not been effectively conveyed to the public.
Many of the issues of public distrust might be put to rest if doctors properly counselled the patients. But given the overcrowded hospitals, the shortage of human resources and the acute stress under which healthcare workers function, trust has only declined. The medical fraternity believes that the media’s coverage of incidents of perceived medical negligence have only worsened the situation.
It does not bode well for the health system to have doctors in a combative mood. Creating safe workplaces for healthcare workers is important for improving the delivery of quality service. The State government has made sizeable investments, especially during the pandemic, in augmenting health infrastructure. Increasing human resources and improving the security system would go a long way in boosting the confidence and morale of a weary workforce.
maya.c@thehindu.co.in
New Delhi, June 27: Several members are reported to have told the meeting of the Parliamentary Consultative Committee for Finance to-day that demonetisation of currency would not help in unearthing black money in the country. The meeting presided over by the Finance Minister, Mr. Y.B. Chavan heard the views of members on the measures proposed by the Wanchoo Committee for unearthing black money, greater administrative control for tax collection and demonetisation of currency. The committee will to-morrow continue the discussion on the recommendations of the Wanchoo committee on tax reforms. On the question of unearthing black money, it was pointed out by some members that in the recent raids on houses of film stars in Bombay, hardly any cash was found by Income-Tax officials. Black money was not kept in cash but converted into gold jewellery and other valuables. They said many people fearing demonetisation would have converted higher denomination notes into hundred rupee notes which were also in the hands of many people in the villages. Demonetisation of hundred rupee notes was completely inadequate to tackle the problem, they said. Almost all speakers are also reported to have criticised the recommendations made by the committee for reduction of tax rates on personal income. They pointed out that if the tax rates at the highest slab were reduced as recommended by the committee, there was no guarantee that people would still not resort to tax evasion. Members said that lowering of tax rates would not lead to removal of disparities.
On June 24, the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) struck a blow against American women’s rights over their bodies by overturning the 1973 Roe v Wade judgment, which ensured the nationwide right to abortion. The judgment in the case of Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organisation upheld the controversial Mississippi Gestational Age Act which bans abortions after 15 weeks of pregnancy, while overruling Roe, as well as the 1992 Planned Parenthood v Casey judgment, both of which had given American women the right to safe and legal abortions.
The court held Roe as “egregiously wrong” and said it will “return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives”, clearing the path for bans in 26 states. In doing so, however, it may have gone against what a majority of the American people want. A recent Gallup poll found that 55 per cent of Americans identified as “pro choice”, with 52 per cent saying they found abortion “morally acceptable” — the highest ever number to say so. Popular majorities may sometimes prove transient, but Dobbs has irreversibly damaged the edifice of individual rights built, piece by piece, over two centuries, dealing a body blow to the evolving 21st century American understanding of what liberty and self-determination is, the freedoms it entails. The court’s argument that the right to abortion was neither upheld by the constitution nor “deeply rooted in this nation’s history and tradition” fails to take into account how much the American rights landscape has changed since 1789, when the constitution took effect. Where the American woman was once invisible to those who drafted the document, she is now an equal citizen. The denial of bodily autonomy can take an incalculable toll on women’s ability to fully participate in the nation’s social and economic life — not to mention the risk to their own health and lives, as many will be forced to seek illegal, unsafe abortions. Even as the Biden administration moves to ensure that abortion pills are accessible in states that ban the medical procedure, the future of other rights also seems to be in question. Alarm bells are ringing over Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring note urging the “reconsideration” of all cases which guaranteed rights to contraception and same-sex relationships and marriage.
By taking away a right, the court has set a dangerous precedent and the ripples will be felt beyond US borders. Around the world, the US has been seen to lead the march towards greater individual rights. The struggle to keep the individual at the heart of an expansive rights-based framework could now get tougher.
This editorial first appeared in the print edition on June 28, 2022 under the title ‘Long step back’.
Israel’s invasion army warned the people of Beirut to use the two-day-old cease-fire to get out of the city. In leaflets dropped over the encircled capital, the Israeli army said its war against the Palestinians was not yet over. “The Israeli defence forces are continuing their war against the terrorists and have not yet used all their might,” the leaflets said. “Use the cease-fire to save your life,” the Arabic-language leaflets told Beirut residents. In response, the PLO vowed in a broadcast over its Voice of Palestine radio station to “fight to defend Beirut… and exact a heavy, very heavy price from the enemy for any attempt to storm the city.”
Pakistan has sent high-power military teams to the United States, Britain, West Germany and Italy to acquire sophisticated electronic countermeasures equipment to further increase the offensive capabilities of its armed forces. Under a recently signed contract, Pakistan has started receiving highly sophisticated low-level mobile radars and other communication equipment from a West European country. Pakistan has also concluded an agreement with the United States for the supply of automatic data handling equipment. A major portion of this new ware equipment is now being flown into Pakistan. According to military experts in New Delhi, Pakistan has also drawn up a very ambitious programme for modification of its air force.
In a most baffling turn of events, Mizo guerrillas have decided to stay clear of the security forces in their renewed campaign of terror. Instructions to their cadres are clear: “Security forces should in no way be touched unless it’s unavoidable”. Observers interpret this as a sign of both the insurgents’ weakness and cunning.
Wimbledon 2022 isn’t like its previous editions. As the most eagerly awaited tennis major opened to a diluted draw and several low-key first-round matches, the impact of its vulnerability to geopolitics hit home. In April, in what was seen as an over-reaction in many quarters, the most celebrated tennis tournament banned Russian and Belarusian players because of the war in Ukraine. The move did not go down well with the tennis fraternity, creating further divisions in an already fractured sport. The All England Club’s decision — not followed by any other event around the globe — has kept out men’s No 1 Daniil Medvedev, No 8 Andrey Rublev, and three of the women’s top 20 — Aryna Sabalenka, Daria Kasatkina and Victoria Azarenka from the well-manicured grass courts.
Global tennis bodies — ATP and WTA — haven’t remained silent. They have stripped Wimbledon of ranking points in the strongest rebuke of an event in recent history. The biggest victim of these unfortunate circumstances is one of the game’s superstars, Serbian Novak Djokovic, in line to become only the fourth men’s player (after Bjorn Borg, Pete Sampras and Roger Federer) to win a fourth consecutive Wimbledon title. Because of the complex ranking calculations, and the ATP decision, Djokovic is sure to lose his place in the Top 5 even if he wins here. Joining Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer in the GOAT race, Djokovic wouldn’t mind exchanging points for the trophy but not everyone is on the same page as him. Multiple Grand Slam winner Naomi Osaka considers the oldest Grand Slam tournament “more like an exhibition” minus ranking points.
The other regular feature missing at Wimbledon this year will be Federer, whose blend of elegant and powerful tennis came to define the tournament for the better part of two decades. The junior singles champion in 1998, Federer has played in every main draw event in the 22 years since. He misses out due to an injury. It’s too much of a change for this ancient venue steeped in customs to take.
This editorial first appeared in the print edition on June 28, 2022 under the title ‘A paler Wimbledon’.
Five years after the shift to the Goods and Services Tax, the 47th meeting of the GST Council, scheduled to be held in Chandigarh on June 28-29, is expected to take up proposals aimed at plugging leakages and shoring up compliance. It is also likely to consider measures for stricter scrutiny and verification of high risk tax payers, and take a call on the recommendation by the ministerial panel headed by Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad Sangma to levy 28 per cent tax on online gaming, casino and horse racing. In addition to these, the Council will address several contentious issues. It will not be easy, given that this meeting comes amidst growing tensions between the Centre and the states over the country’s fiscal architecture, and after a recent Supreme Court judgment which emphasised that decisions of the GST Council are not binding on states.
To begin with, the five-year GST compensation period — the framework designed to provide certainty to state finances as part of the grand bargain struck between the Centre and the states to push through GST — is coming to an end. Fearing a collapse in their revenues, states have repeatedly asked for an extension of this mechanism. Their concerns appear legitimate. As reported in this paper, the all-India average shortfall between the protected revenues and the post-settlement gross state GST was 27.2 per cent in 2021-22, with only five states registering a revenue growth higher than the protected GST revenues. However, so far, the Centre has shown no inclination to accede to the states request. While a few days ago, it did extend the compensation levy till March 2026, it is only to repay the loans taken over the past few years to compensate states for the shortfall in revenue during the Covid period — borrowings stood at Rs 1.1 lakh crore in 2020-21 and Rs 1.59 lakh crore in 2021-22. Alongside, the Council will also need to deliberate on the issue of raising tax rates, considering that GST collections have fallen well short of expectations. As per a study by the Reserve Bank of India, the weighted average GST tax rate has declined from 14.4 per cent at the time of inception to 11.6 per cent in September 2019. In comparison, the revenue neutral rate was estimated at 15.5 per cent by the Subramanian Committee report. There are several options that the Council can explore, ranging from increasing the lower tax slabs to merging others. Reportedly, it is expected to take up an interim report on the issue of rate rationalisation submitted by the GoM headed by Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai.
The consultative and consensual nature of decision-making that has helped guide the Council’s decisions so far must be adhered to. Addressing the contentious issues will, first and foremost, require bridging the trust deficit between the Centre and states. The spirit of cooperative federalism, often advocated by the ruling dispensation, must be upheld.
This editorial first appeared in the print edition on June 28, 2022 under the title ‘Five year itch’.
On 24 June 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) overturned the landmark Roe v Wade case, which guaranteed abortion as a constitutionally protected right in 1973. The reversal took place by the conservative-majority court in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization. SCOTUS held that the Constitution of the United States does not confer a right to abortion, overruling Roe and returning the authority to regulate abortion to “the people and their elected representatives”, meaning state authorities. The court found that the right to abortion is not deeply rooted in US history and tradition, and that the right to abortion is not part of a broader entrenched right to autonomy.
In Dobbs, the Court characterised Roe as “egregiously wrong and on a collision course with the Constitution from the day it was decided”. The judgment stated that the court’s decision in Roe “short-circuited the democratic process” by excluding those who disagreed with the decision, imposing detailed conditions for different stages of pregnancy, similar to a statute or law. The judgment was delivered by Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Thomas, Kavanaugh and Gorsuch. Only Justices Breyer, Sotomayor and Kagan passed a dissenting opinion. The immediate implication of the majority opinion is that about 26 American states are certain or likely to ban abortions, with 13 states having “trigger bans” that take effect immediately upon the overruling of Roe.
Criminalising abortion is a major legal barrier to safe abortion access, forcing women to resort to risky underground abortion procedures. In the 2016 Mellet v. Ireland decision by the UN Human Rights Committee, the petitioner described the traumatic experience of having to travel out of her country (as abortion was not permitted in Ireland at the time) to access abortion services, and inability to access post-abortion and bereavement counselling. Criminalising abortion does not decrease the demand for services, but merely forces women to undergo significant burdens to access it.
Many countries have decriminalised or are moving towards the decriminalisation of abortion. Vietnam provides abortion on request, having decriminalised it in the 1960s, and explicitly recognises women’s unconditional right to abortion. In Canada, the Supreme Court in R v. Morgentaler held that the restrictions on abortion constituted a “breach of security of the person” interfering with a woman’s bodily integrity, right to life and liberty. Other countries have relaxed restrictions on abortions, even if it is still within the criminal code. Singapore provides for abortion on request up to 24 weeks on grounds of rape/incest, risk to the woman’s life, or on diagnosis of foetal anamoly. Nepal permits abortions on request up to 12 weeks, and further up to 28 weeks on medical or compassionate grounds. Reversing the right to abortion at a time when most countries are moving towards decriminalisation and the upholding of abortion on demand can have severe implications on legal and policy trajectories affecting the reproductive rights of persons globally.
Firstly, it could infuse domestic anti-abortion movements with both symbolic and financial resources to expand anti-choice campaigning. It can also embolden anti-choice movements to adopt similar legislative strategies to challenge abortion in countries where it is legal. Further, as indicated by Justice Clarence Thomas, this reversal is likely to endanger constitutionally recognised rights to same-sex relationships and contraception, among others. Secondly, it cannot be denied that America is a global hegemonic power, with Roe providing a well-recognised framework for those involved in local abortion advocacy to articulate local abortion rights and demands. Third, the overturning of Roe can have grave implications on international funding provided by the USA for the upholding and protection of sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) in low and middle-income countries. Finally, the judgment is an important international precedent used in courts across the world to grant abortion rights — the Australian legislature, Supreme Court of Canada and High Court of Pretoria have all cited Roe.
In India, Justice Chandrachud cited Roe in Justice K S Puttaswamy v Union of India, while including the right to privacy and decisional autonomy within constitutionally protected fundamental rights. The reversal is unlikely to impact domestic law. India has a strong legislative framework on abortion governed by the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 amended in 2021. Although India’s penal code criminalises abortion, the MTP Act outlines the statutory exceptions that make abortions legal. The Act provides for legal abortion services up to 24 weeks under certain conditions, with the approval of one or two registered medical professionals. Further, it has no upper gestational limit in the case of abortions on the grounds of foetal anomalies but leaves the adjudication of such abortions to medical boards. Even though seemingly progressive, the law has been criticised for being doctor-centric, premised on a eugenic, patriarchal and cis-heteronormative rationale.
The overturning of Roe signals abdication of judicial responsibility from the highest court of the country in a split opinion — based on the ideological bent of individual judges in the SCOTUS, which has the potential to not just affect individualised rights, but also to foster a trend amongst courts across the world to make decisions based on prevailing political environments.
In SCOTUS’ dissenting opinion, the majority judgment was called out for violating stare decisis, which forms a “foundation stone” for the rule of law, and is described by the minority opinion as being a “doctrine of judicial modesty and humility”. Deviation from established rule of law also lends credence to the legal indeterminacy argument, where all legal outcomes of a case can be justified as being legally “correct”, regardless of the erstwhile position. The disregard of the SCOTUS majority with respect to decades-old established legal precedent, as well as the elimination of the erstwhile balanced constitutional regime that weighed both federal and pregnant persons’ interest for a regime that now only weighs state interest, has serious implications for the latter’s sexual and reproductive health rights. This is a painful example of a gendered construction and interpretation of the Constitution and judicial politics, rather than the upholding of constitutional rights and morality, in turn exhibiting a lack of constitutional courage.
The writer is professor, Jindal Global Law School
From the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 till the end of the First World War in 1918, military strategists had convinced themselves that once a general mobilisation for war was ordered it must culminate in a full-scale conflict. For, rolling back a fully marshalled army from going into battle had grave internal consequences including and not limited to regime change.
In May 1892, in a memorandum to the Russian Foreign Minister Nikolay Girs, the Adjutant General of the Russian Army Nikolai Orbuchev explained why the traditional method of determining casus belli of war had been overtaken by modern technology. What mattered most now was who mobilised first and not who fired the first shot. “The undertaking of mobilisation cannot be considered as a peaceful act. On the contrary, it represents the most decisive act of war,” he opined.
Within a month of the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir to the Austro-Hungarian throne, on June 28, 1914, the doomsday machine of general mobilisation unleashed itself. Once Austria-Hungary and Germany started to mobilise, other European powers followed suit and World War I commenced. By 1918, this Armageddon had left 17 million people dead.
The Second World War was triggered by the imperatives of the alliance system. In 1938, German troops annexed Austria before occupying Sudetenland, a part of German-speaking Czechoslovakia. However when the Nazis marched into Poland on September 1, 1939, Great Britain, according to the terms of the Anglo-Polish Pact, declared war on Germany on September 3. France followed suit and the war dominos were in full play. By the time it was all over in 1945, 85 million people were dead and large parts of the world lay in ruins.
The alliance and mobilisation templates were carried forward into the Cold War till the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. In the calculation of war planners on both sides, the principal land battle in Europe would be fought on the northern German plains fit for attacks by mass concentrations of heavy armour. This again necessitated the deployment of large conventional armies. Added to this was the MAD doctrine – mutually assured destruction – inserted into the dynamic of war by nuclear weapons.
However, by 1975, US defence experts chastened by the checkmate in the Korean War and defeat in Vietnam, seriously started rethinking the structure and contours of a future armed force because they correctly anticipated that the landscape of warfare would rapidly transform itself given the swift technological advances taking place.
Moreover, nimble and mobile North Korean and Vietcong forces had effectively repulsed a conventionally superior US military power over long standoffs. The long-serving director of the office of Net Assessments in the Pentagon Andrew Marshall provided the intellectual heft to this process of restructuring.
By the time Donald Rumsfeld assumed the mantle of US Defence Secretary again in the George W Bush administration, there had been a veritable revolution in military affairs encompassing a multitude of technological progressions in computing, communications, space know-how, and transformative changes that were unfolding even in the manufacturing domain. Coupled with the rise of transnational non-state actors, the nature of conflict and warfare was also evolving rapidly.
The US was the only country that saw the coming revolution in military affairs. Even Soviet military theorists, way back in the early 1970s, had started applying themselves to military-technical revolutions. By the mid-1990s, even China, fuelled by a decade of economic growth, had commenced a fundamental restructuring of both its force and command structures.
The trigger for the reforms in China were the twin projections of power by the US, namely the Gulf War of 1990 and the Taiwan Strait Crisis of 1995. The Chinese Communist Party leadership recognised that it lacked the technological prowess to wage a modern war that could proscribe foreign powers from intervening in the region. They adopted a three-pronged approach by exponentially ramping up defence spending. It involved investing in new weaponry, enhancing anti-access area denial tactics, and establishing programmes to boost the Chinese defence industry.
However one of the fundamental changes they initiated was to develop an integrated fighting force with first-rate naval and air capabilities. As the other services expanded, the army was shrunk to around 9,75,000 from an approximate three million in the mid-70s and the higher defence management paradigm was reorganised into theatre commands by February 2016.
In the wake of the Kargil War in 1999, India also started seriously thinking of reforming and modernising its defence forces and command and control structures. Among a slew of reforms that the Kargil Review Committee (KRC) recommended, one pertained to the recruitment practices of the armed forces. It stated, “the Army must be young and fit at all times. Therefore, instead of the present practice of having 17 years of colour service (as has been the policy since 1976), it would be advisable to reduce the colour service to a period of seven to ten years and, thereafter, release these officers and men for service here”.
In 2000, a Group of Ministers (GOM) endorsed the KRC’s recommendation stating that, “in order to ensure that the armed forces are at their fighting best at all times, there is a need to ensure a younger profile of the services. However, this is a highly complex matter. While the army desires a younger age profile, so do the central paramilitary forces (CPMFs)”. The Naresh Chandra Task Force on National Security set up by the UPA government in 2011 also addressed this issue. Its report, however, is not public so far.
Thus the Agniveer recruitment reform must be contextualised in the backdrop of the larger canvas of defence reforms that include the appointment of a CDS, a reorganisation of the armed forces into theatre commands to promote jointness and synergy.
The future of warfare entails a lighter human footprint, but soldiers equipped with state-of-the-art weaponry, supported by cutting-edge technology to fight a war in a highly informationised environment. This recruitment reform would help in right sizing the armed forces provided it gets dovetailed into the imperatives of fifth generation warfare.
The writer, a lawyer, is a Congress MP and former I&B Minister. Views are personal
The arrest of journalist Mohammed Zubair in Delhi is pettiness, vengeance and repression let loose on a society once aspiring to be free. It is also a distillation of the way in which the Narendra Modi government draws energy from a thorough contempt for liberty, decency, constitutional values, and the opinion of the international community. The arrest comes just as the PM was singing paeans to Indian democracy in Munich, milking the Emergency way past its political expiry date and signing protocols on free speech. It is a reminder to the world that with this regime, you have to vigilantly watch what it does and not be duped by what it says.
Let us look at the larger political and institutional context of this story. The outfit that Mohammed Zubair helped run, Alt News, did sterling service for India’s democracy, holding onto the now elusive idea that facts might matter. His courage has been an inspiration. He brought to our attention the fact that Nupur Sharma, a high office-bearer of the ruling BJP, had engaged in a speech about Prophet Mohammed that could only be considered vile. There were communal riots in the wake of that speech and international condemnation of India. This column had argued that what made Nupur Sharma’s speech dangerous was that it expressed the sentiments of the ruling party (‘Beware of half victories’, IE, June 8). She should have been politically punished. But liberals should have resisted calling for her arrest and using FIRs because, in the long run, such moves only serve to weaken the free speech regime, and it makes the protection of free speech open to competitive communal mobilisation.
Zubair’s arrest sends several messages. First, it is pure revenge, through and through. It was a matter of time before the Modi government unleashed a politics of revenge in the wake of its international humiliation. Second, the purpose is to keep the free speech debate hostage to communal politics. That he has been allegedly arrested for a 2018 tweet, which used a trope about a hotel from an old Hindi film, might make this case seem farcical. Surely, you might say, this case cannot be serious? But the purpose is to create a narrative of victimhood that our free speech regime allows Hindu gods to be mocked but not the Prophet. The farcical nature of the charge is designed to play on that card.
It might be pointed out that many purveyors of hate speech in the ruling party, even those who have directly incited violence, roam free. The government is selective in who it targets using Section 153 of the IPC. But this selectivity has its political functions. It underscores the point that the majority can act with impunity. Ministers can incite violence without consequence, but how dare a Zubair raise his voice? These arrests give wind to the fantasy of majoritarian impunity and privilege. Finally, it is common knowledge that Zubair’s crime was not mocking Hindu gods. It was to stand steadfast on one thing that makes this government tremble with fear and rage — facts. Perhaps Zubair will be lucky and a judge with an iota of professional competence will see through the farce of his arrest. But the signal is clear.
This arrest has to be seen as part of the larger pattern of arbitrariness and repression: ED and CBI raids, whenever political convenient, the use of UAPA charges against innocent students, the communally targeted bulldozing of properties, the control over the media, the use of vigilante violence, and the complete decimation of all independent institutions. PM Modi rightly and vehemently objects to the Emergency. But it almost seems as if his charge is that, as bad as the Emergency was, it was not done right: It did not have the kind of insidiousness, communal charge, slow torture that this regime aspires to.
But this repression of liberty is aided by wider complicity. This column had once used the phrase judicial barbarism (‘Lordships and masters,’ IE November 18, 2020) to describe the conduct of India’s highest court. Now, in retrospect, the term judicial was superfluous in that description. It still suggested some deference to judicial form, some procedure, some fig leaf of a rule by law, if not rule of law. But the conduct of the Supreme Court over the last few days has only underscored the fact that in many cases, calling its proceedings judicial is to cut it too much slack. The Court may have had its reasons to decide the Zakia Jafri case the way it did. But to unleash the might of the state on the petitioners who have been fighting an almost lone legal battle to get justice to the victims of the Gujarat riots; to convict them without a trial is a new and chilling precedent. Even if one grants, for argument’s sake, mistakes on the petitioner’s part, what the Court is licensing is nothing but revenge against those seeking justice.
Then there is the farce being played out over the Maharashtra Assembly, where the Court has just committed full-blown murder of the Tenth Schedule and the anti-defection law. It has muddied the Speaker’s powers; it has in effect given the BJP what it wanted — more time to horse trade. But what links the cases — Zubair, the Gujarat petitioners, and the Maharashtra Assembly episode – is a complete inversion of justice. Facts are crimes, seeking justice is a sin and democracy is best served by judicial arbitrariness.
But these cases are not likely to evoke much public response. Amongst the well-meaning people, there is still a tendency to see these cases as exceptional, the deviations that scar but do not challenge the basic constitutional scheme. We will go through the motions as if our institutions still provide a conduit for constitutional argument and justice. If we are lucky, an occasional brave judge might give a Zubair relief and we can all go through our lives with a clean conscience, even as the system collapses around us.
But more ominously, there will be celebrations of this state impunity, there will be cheering for communalism, and triumphal assertions that liberals are worse than tyrants. The Emergency in 1975 was repressive, but it did not dull our intellects, eviscerate our conscience, or extinguish our fighting spirit. The Supreme Court accused activists of keeping the pot boiling. For once, the Court, like the government, knows what it is talking about: boiling. Between them, they have burnt democracy, liberty and secular political values to death. All that remains is the burnt embers, emitting the stench of tyranny. Zubair is the latest victim. There will be countless more.
The writer is contributing editor, The Indian Express
The cycle, however long, eventually turns. And turned it has, in India. The startup ecosystem which has been in overdrive for the past few years — propelled by a combination of factors, but largely, by the era of cheap money — is now showing signs of weakness. And with this turn comes the realisation that many of the assumptions that underpinned the stratospheric valuations were unhinged from reality.
It was hard not to be swept by the allure and promise of the new age tech companies. Built on a compelling narrative — the combination of accelerated financial inclusion (bank accounts), ease of identification (Aadhaar) and connectivity (mobile phones) — it is ultimately a bet on the Indian consumer, and the economy, not on government regulations/policies. In the era of cheap money and negative real interest rates, uncomfortable questions over the true market size and profitability were swept under the rug. High cash burn rates were the norm as both startups and investors sought growth by subsidising the customer.
But profitability is not just an arcane concept that belongs to another century. Among the startups that have gone public in recent times, Paytm’s losses stood at Rs 2,396 crore in 2021-22, while for Zomato and PB Fintech (PolicyBazaar) losses were Rs 1,222 crore and Rs 832 crore respectively. The seemingly inexhaustible source of cash that funds such losses is now being squeezed. Sure, investors will continue to pour money. Some early age start-ups will continue to be funded, as will some of the more mature ones. But investors are likely to be more circumspect in their dealings. This will include the entire range — from early stage venture capitalists to institutional and retail investors — all of whom have made money, but have also burnt their fingers.
Recently, Alibaba and Ant Financial exited their entire holdings in Paytm Mall for Rs 42 crore, valuing the venture at a mere Rs 100 crore — a far cry from the $3 billion valuation ascribed to the company in its last fund-raising round. There are also reports of startups in diverse markets, ranging from Ola to OYO, planning to raise funds at lower valuations. Among those who have gone public in recent times, most are trading much below their listing price.
During the heady days, many numbers, indicators of the size of the market or TAM (the total addressable market), were bandied about. One such number thrown around is the smartphone users in the country — some have pegged this at 500 million. Or the transactions routed through the UPI platform — in May there were almost six billion transactions worth Rs 10 trillion. Or the near universality of bank accounts. But in reality, for most of these startups, the market or even the potential market is just a fraction of this. Whichever way one slices the data, the reality is, there aren’t that many consumers with significant discretionary spending capacity, and those with the capacity aren’t increasing their spending as these companies would hope. This seems to be the case across startups for a range for products/services.
Take Zomato, for instance. In 2021-22, 535 million orders for food delivery were placed on the platform. Considering that the company has 50 million annual transacting consumers, this translates to just under 11 orders per customer for the entire year or less than one order per customer per month. Of these 50 million customers, only 15 million transacted at least once a month, while 1.8 million did so once a week. In the case of Nykaa, the average monthly unique visitors range from around 16 million for the fashion vertical to 21 million for the beauty and personal care products. However, the number of transacting customers is only 1.8 million and 8.4 million respectively. Similarly, while Policy Bazaar has around 59 million registered customers, only 11.8 million are unique purchasing customers.
What is equally worrying is the complete absence of any increase in spending by even these consumers who would have the capacity to spend more. In 2020-21, the average order value on Zomato was Rs 397. In 2021-22, it was Rs 398. In the case of Nykaa, the average order value in the beauty and personal care vertical was Rs 1,732 during January-March 2022 — the lowest it has been in the last eight quarters. In the fashion category, it was almost flat compared to the same period last year. In the case of PolicyBazaar, the situation isn’t any different.
While more consumers are on-board digital payment platforms — Paytm has about 70 million monthly transacting users — these numbers suggest that when it comes to consumers with considerable discretionary spending, the size of the market shrivels considerably. While these companies have seen an increase in the number of transacting customers, to what extent the overall customer base for these startups can expand further is constrained by the number of households in the cohort that has significant spending power. And if sales of small cars, a marker of an increase in discretionary spending, a sign of ascendancy to the ranks to the middle class, aren’t growing — sales of Maruti Suzuki’s mini and compact segments, which account for roughly two-thirds of the car makers domestic sales, actually contracted in 2021-22 — then it is perhaps the clearest indication that the market just isn’t expanding. The macro reality is catching up.
Tighter financial conditions, a re-rating of the market, will impact both fundraising efforts and valuations. Several questions arise. To what extent will investors continue to subsidise consumers? Will startups still command the same valuations they have received in previous fundraising rounds? Or will we see down rounds? Some startups will survive this period. Many may not. And changes in the dynamics of private markets will also have a bearing on public markets.
Intriguingly, though, even as questions over the prospects of startups, consumers, and the economy are being raised, valuations of some companies in sectors more tightly regulated, more directly influenced by government policies, seem to defy gravity. For some of these companies, the price-to-earnings ratio is even higher than the astronomical price-to-rent ratios of residential real estate in Delhi.
This column first appeared in the print edition on June 28, 2022 under the title ‘On startups, a gravity check’. Write to the author at ishan.bakshi@expressindia.com.
As technology flattens the world, the way we operate our daily lives — travel, entertain, educate, shop, communicate and even obtain food — is undergoing a radical change. This has impacted a variety of stakeholders in the country differently – there are obvious winners and losers. The nature of our success in dealing with this change will lie in the ways in which we deal with the concerns of all players.
The proliferation of a wide range of e-commerce platforms has created convenience and increased consumer choice. But in hindsight, the initial cashback and deep discounts have turned out to be a forerunner to addiction. The online aggregator platforms have also damaged large segments of small and medium businesses through their dominant position and the malpractices this position allows them to indulge in. There is a clear pattern that shows the domination of a few big platforms.
These companies resort to predatory pricing to acquire customers even as they suffer persistent financial losses — SEBI is rightly revisiting the valuation norms of such companies looking to list on the stock exchange. They take away choice from suppliers and consumers. This, in the long run, can be viewed as an exclusionary practice that eliminates other players from the market. The ultimate loss bearer is the consumer who will have a reduced bargaining position due to less competition and will be subject to the arbitrariness of monopolistic conduct.
Be it e-marketplaces like Amazon and Flipkart or food service aggregators like Zomato or Swiggy or travel aggregators like MakeMyTrip and OYO, all have been accused of distorting the market. The story of big technology companies like Google, Facebook, and Apple is different, and best left for another time.
While neutrality is the fundamental basis of a marketplace and a level playing field is in the fitness of things, claims of outfits such as Flipkart or Amazon to be a marketplace for a wide variety of sellers can be questioned. A few select sellers, who are generally affiliated with the platform, reap the benefits of greater visibility and better terms of trade — reduced commissions and platform-funded discounts. Zomato, like other food aggregators, is said to run cloud kitchens. Many of them run private-labelled products in categories where other sellers have been successful. The associate companies are prominent sellers on their platform. It is alleged that undue advantage is given while recommending or listing these products.
Online travel aggregators are often accused of cartelisation. The Competition Commission of India’s investigation in the OYO-MakeMyTrip collusion case resulted in MakeMyTrip being ordered to relist properties of Treebo and FabHotels. Other such arbitrary removals or suppressions of listing of competing products and services have also been heard of.
While using these platforms, citizens share their data voluntarily and involuntarily. The aggregators gather shopping habits, consumer preferences, and other personal data. The platforms are accused of using this data — data that is neither created by them (it is created by customers) nor for them (it is created for sellers of the product/service) — to create and improve their own products and services, taking away business from other sellers on their platform. They capitalise on this data and information about other brands to launch competing products on their marketplace. This information asymmetry is exploited by the aggregators to devour organisations they promise to support. They provide more prominent listings for their private labels and as they have complete control over customer reviews and ratings on the platform; manipulation and arbitrary removal have also been reported.
Another issue often noticed is the lack of a fair and transparent dispute resolution mechanism for sellers on these platforms. Delayed payments, unreasonable charges, and hidden fees are common occurrences. The power of these platforms is at the cost of small hardworking businesses. Small restaurants complain that food-service aggregators’ inability to service a customer request is attributed to the restaurant’s inability. Similarly, hotels listed on these platforms are blamed for customer grievances arising from over-committing. In some cases, restaurants and hotels are arbitrarily shown as closed. Large restaurants with their own delivery networks are forced to use the aggregator’s delivery services.
Unreasonable and one-sided contracts allow travel aggregators to have a disparity clause (in the rates) which allows them to offer rooms at a much cheaper rate but bars the hotels from doing so. Restaurants are many a time forced to accept orders at prices much lower than their agreement. Hotels are denied delisting from platforms; other exit clauses are restrictive. Taxis attached with aggregators like Ola and Uber are pressured to use the company’s payment system and are often at the receiving end of arbitrary charges.
Across the world, small businesses are suffering from the unethical practices and unequal bargaining power of these large platforms. It is time that a set of comprehensive rules and regulations is put together. These regulations need to be inclusive, should eliminate the conflicts of interest inherent in current market practices, and prevent any anti-competitive practices. A model agreement that is fair and allows a level playing field between the aggregators and their business partners should be implemented. There is a lot to learn from the Digital Markets Act of the EU that seeks to address unfair practices by these gatekeepers. Strong and quick grievance redressal and dispute resolution mechanisms should be established. The rules should allow for punitive penalties for unfair practices. Market dominance and subsequent invoking of fair competition rules should be triggered at the level of micro-markets and for product segments.
This column first appeared in the print edition on June 28, 2022 under the title ‘A skewed playing field’. The writer is Rajya Sabha MP and former deputy chief minister of Bihar
The number of cricketers from Madhya Pradesh who have played for India — though the list includes luminaries like CK Nayudu and Syed Mushtaq Ali — cannot comprise a full team. It falls one short of 11. So Madhya Pradesh upstaging Mumbai — record Ranji Trophy winners and the team that can field multiple international elevens — for the maiden Ranji Trophy title is a heart-warming underdog story, scripted without star talent, or years of accumulated knowhow, but starring a genial old coach from Mumbai and his motley gang of rejects, unknowns and never-weres.
It’s a story of hope and optimism, an example of how hard work, planning and courage could overcome a dearth of twinkling talent. Yet, it’s a story that you could soon forget, as you had forgotten the fairy-tale narratives of Vidarbha, Gujarat and Saurashtra in the last six years. It’s no fault of yours — there is a deluge of cricketing fixtures around the world, far more glamorous and exciting than what unfurled in Bengaluru. There was Jasprit Bumrah and Virat Kolhi duelling, perhaps for the first time in a red-ball game in a warm-up game in Leicester; there are Brendon McCullum’s red-ball radicals engaged in a seesaw tussle with Trent Boult’s swing and seam heavy-metal chords; a closely-fought white-ball series just ended in Sri Lanka. Not to forget, it’s not even a month since the IPL final. And before you have the time to catch your breath, the T20 World Cup would blast through the windows of your drawing room.
You consume more than you could remember. It’s normal for the brain to eliminate what is more forgettable. Let’s strip that veneer of pretence— Ranji Trophy, the premier domestic tournament in name, doesn’t occupy as much space in our cricketing consciousness as other tournaments. It’s not on your list of unmissables — you don’t bunk classes or skip office hours so that you could watch Madhya Pradesh take on Mumbai. You watch if you have time — if there is nothing else on.
It is not part of the national conversation or debates, unless you’re a red-ball cricket fanatic, it does not create any buzz. The year before, when the edition was scrapped altogether due to the pandemic, Star Sports did not bang down the doors of the Board, demanding it is played at all costs. Unlike the invincible IPL— not the pandemic, not polls, not a recession, perhaps not even war, has powers to stop it.
But the Ranji Trophy exists, providing a background hum to a busy season, quietly developing the next generation of international players, sometimes acting as a retreat for out-of-form international players and providing a vast canvas to players from every corner of the country. The net the Ranji Trophy casts is three times wider than the IPL or any other tournament, now that the Northeastern states are also involved. A total of 38 teams competed in the tournament this year, and almost 750 different players. For the national team, it’s a more robust and enduring supply chain than the IPL.
Yet, in a painful irony, the road to stardom is easier through the IPL. To tweak that old Vinod Kambli quote, “IPL stars take the elevator while domestic cricketers take the stairs.” Whereas Umran Malik became a household name overnight, Mayank Agarwal had to rack up more than 2,000 runs a season to become half as famous. Only a few would remember Shams Mulani or Kumar Kartikeya, the highest and second-highest wicket-takers this season.
The IPL is not to blame for the unglamorousness of the Ranji Trophy. It is a reflection of the altered cricketing milieu and its values. It’s the same in England and Australia, where the 100 and BBL have pushed the County championship and Shield to the background. Domestic tournaments have become truly domestic in that international players barely feature in them. That Bumrah and Kohli have never encountered each other in a red-ball, first class game tells the story.
None of this, though, will threaten the existence of the Ranji Trophy. It is the ultimate survivor that might live as long as Indian cricket itself. But it might be remembered only when a truly spectacular event occurs, or when there is an underdog story to be told. Such stories befit the tournament — underdog tales from an underdog tournament.
Write to the author at sandip.gopal@expressindia.com
Bombay high court’s Nagpur bench has struck a powerful blow against misuse of IPC’s criminal defamation provision. It ruled that a newspaper fairly reporting information in the public domain without insinuation or innuendo cannot attract defamation charges. The case involved a Marathi daily that had reported on a police FIR in 2016. The person booked in the FIR subsequently lodged a criminal defamation complaint. He claimed the newspaper hadn’t done due diligence, citing as defence the chargesheet in the case not naming him an accused.
The Nagpur bench rightly concluded that registration of crimes, filing of cases in courts, progress of investigations, and arrest of persons constitute “news events which public has the right to know”. An FIR may predate a chargesheet by several weeks, months or years. No reporter can know a case’s trajectory at its inception. Moreover, FIRs are public documents, uploaded on police websites. The bench noted that a newspaper isn’t expected to investigate an FIR’s contents and verify its truthfulness but to report facts correctly. Of course, journalists should follow best practices, and seek the other side’s version. But sometimes this isn’t possible when reporting on breaking news like registration of cases or arrest of persons.
Criminal defamation is particularly problematic, allowing complainants to claim the accused had intention to harm reputation. Claiming defamation on intent to harm reputation sets a very low and subjective bar for prosecution. Tamil Nadu’s AIADMK governments were infamous for lodging criminal defamation cases indiscriminately against journalists. With public prosecutors appearing, magistrates often take cognisance of even frivolous matters, prompting a dash to HCs for relief. Sometimes, multiple cases are filed in faraway places because the statute even allows offences only “partly committed” in that jurisdiction. This is punishment disguised as process. The UK’s history of murderous duels to settle slander and insults is said to have precipitated criminal defamation’s entry as a modern penal offence. But the British decriminalised defamation in 2009. India must shed this colonial baggage, too, and get an effective civil libel law.
The outcome of a single Lok Sabha bypoll isn’t usually enough for generalised conclusions. But the victory of SAD (Amritsar) president SS Mann in Punjab’s Sangrur is unusual enough to be the exception. Mann, widely seen as a “radical” politician, defied odds to get past AAP with 35.6% of the vote share. Sangrur is the home turf of Punjab CM Bhagwant Singh Mann, who won the seat in the last two LS elections. Significantly, candidates of three parties that have long administered Punjab, SAD, Congress and BJP, lost their deposits.
Reasons for Mann’s victory include disenchantment with AAP setting in quickly. However, it’s important to locate his win in the backdrop of SAD’s freefall and the unsettled state Punjab seems to be in. SAD’s political evolution is entwined with that of Sikhism. A watershed moment came in 1996 when under Prakash Singh Badal’s leadership the party prioritised regional identity over the religious. The reorientation helped SAD defang centrifugal forces in the state. That phase seems to have ended. In the March assembly elections, SAD finished third with 18.4% of the votes. In the Sangrur bypoll, SAD came fifth with 6.2% of the votes.
Mann, as a report in this paper pointed out, was gaining traction even without organisational infrastructure. Defeated repeatedly after his LS victory in 1999, Mann this time had the support of slain singer Sidhu Moose Wala, whose posthumous song SYL was blocked on YouTube following GoI’s complaint about its contents. The song asked for sovereignty for Punjab and hailed a Khalistani militant. Plus, Mann’s Twitter profile says that he’s Sangrur’s MP and also that he’s striving for Khalistan.
These are troubling portents by themselves made even more troubling by Punjab’s economic situation. India’s main contributor to the PDS is struggling. Punjab’s May unemployment rate of 9.2% was above the national average. AAP government’s maiden budget presented yesterday highlights some symptoms of the economic challenge, for example, a declining share of its own tax revenue in overall receipts. Mainstream parties should worry about Mann’s victory.
GoI is contemplating a complete exit from banking through amendments enabling legislation for its stake to fall below 51% in public sector banks (PSBs). Amendments to the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, which was listed for introduction in the winter session of Parliament in 2021, are likely to be tabled in the upcoming monsoon session, and could contain a clause that permits GoI to shed its stakes in state-owned banks below 26%. This follows Nirmala Sitharaman's announcement in the 2021-22 budget that two PSBs and a general insurer would be privatised. The delay in altering the legal framework to actualise this intent provides an indication of the resistance to change involved in the government's effort to pull out of banking.
Privatisation has reached the legislative agenda after a painful decade for state-owned banks that saw their activities frozen by regulations due to mounting bad debts. The subsequent clean-up of bank balance sheets, accomplished with taxpayer money, was followed by a wave of consolidation that merged PSBs with healthy bottom lines with weaker rivals. Now that GoI has a bunch of banks it can take to market, changes to the law that would allow its shareholding to fall up to 26% was a necessary condition for their divestment. In the event, it is going a step beyond to allow the holdings to fall even further.
This will harmonise ownership structures for PSBs and private banks, but critically allows the government an eventual exit route from the business. Much of the stress in the Indian banking system has been identified as arising from government ownership. Regulation has been fractured with the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) having a lower degree of oversight over state-owned banks. Governance has suffered due to political intervention and inadequate managerial remuneration has affected risk assessment. New investors will be justified in seeking improvements on all these counts. By introducing the exit clause, the government is showing it is sensitive to these concerns.
<
Read in source website
The G7 Summit in Bavaria, Germany, ended with the leaders of the world's wealthiest economies maintaining, with some caveats, the general direction of travel towards an economy less dependent on fossil fuels, more secure, and able to better deal with shocks such as the pandemic. The outcome is far from perfect, but is in the right direction.
As a group of the richest countries, all of them democracies, the G7 is, still, important. These are key players in global institutions like the UN and the World Bank. The 2022 summit took place in the context of multiple crises - the climate crisis that underpins all others, the Covid pandemic that has weakened economies pushing some countries further into debt and others to the brink of collapse, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the resulting energy and food crisis. The G7 response to this perfect storm will frame and shape future geopolitics. The last time the G7 (then G8 with now expelled Russia) faced a major crisis, the G20 was formed. While that brought the biggest economies to the high table, it still failed in many ways to find the most effective ways to address the needs of the world, especially the most vulnerable nations. At the 2022 summit, the struggle between the leadership the wealthiest economies need to show and the temptation to tweak the rules to make 'things easy' was on full display. In the end, a compromise that provided some space to address immediate crises such as ensuring energy security was agreed upon.
As a democracy and growing economy facing its own challenges, India is G7's natural partner. This partnership needs to be nurtured, as does G7's engagement with other middle-income developing countries, if it is to remain relevant and be effective.
<
Read in source website
The centrepiece of Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi’s pitch to the world’s richest nations at the G-7 summit in Germany was equity in energy access. Mr Modi said that access to energy shouldn’t be the privilege of only the rich at a time when geopolitical tensions are propelling energy costs and pointed out that while providing energy access to its citizens, India has also been meeting its climate commitments, such as generating 40% of energy from non-fossil sources nine years before the target of 2030, and completing the blending of 10% ethanol in petrol five months ahead of the stated deadline. India, the PM added, has the world’s first fully solar-powered airport, and its railway system will become net zero in this decade, while the delivery of LED bulbs and clean cooking gas has shown that millions of tonnes of carbon emissions can be prevented while ensuring energy for the poor.
This is not the first time the PM has underlined the need for universal access to energy. At TERI’s World Sustainable Development Summit in February, he said India’s energy requirements are expected to double in the next 20 years, and added that “denying this energy would be denying life itself to millions”. In the past eight years, the government has focussed on ensuring basic access to energy sources, both electricity and clean cooking fuel. Still, India has a way to go before it can claim to have a 24X7 uninterrupted universal supply of electricity. A study conducted by NITI Aayog in 2020 showed that around 92% of household customers with a grid-based electricity connection have a low sanctioned load of 0-1 kW (76% of customers) or 1-2 kW (16% of customers). The immediate challenge is also to get the states to revitalise the thermal energy sector with better governance and climate-friendly technologies.
While coal will remain an energy mainstay till 2030, India’s thrust on renewable energy (RE) has been remarkable. But the expansion of the RE sector and funding for the transition process will need access to finance under reasonable terms and access to green technology from the West. To date, the West has failed to keep its promise of $100 billion per year, and this has been a sticking point in all climate meets. Every year, India requires at least $170 billion to tackle the climate crisis. By delaying climate finance, the West is blocking the expansion of green energy access, which is hindering India’s socio-economic growth and pushing the world towards a dangerous future.
By delaying climate finance, the West is blocking the expansion of green energy access, which is hindering India’s socio-economic growth and pushing the world towards a dangerous future.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has thrust India into the international spotlight. As the war rages on, what first appeared awkward for neutral New Delhi now appears almost enviable. A series of international suitors — the United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK), Russia, and the European Union (EU) — arrived hat in hand, beseeching India to take their side on Ukraine. During Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s recent travels to Europe and Asia, he found himself assiduously courted by world leaders.
India’s pursuit of maximum options with minimum restrictions hasn’t endeared it to everyone, but so far, a careful and calculating Ukraine diplomacy has paid dividends. As global oil prices soar, energy-starved India has consumed about five times as much Russian oil this year as in all of 2021 — much of it heavily discounted. During his April visit to Delhi, Russia’s foreign minister expressed gratitude for India’s forbearance. The Kremlin’s role in ongoing India-China contention looms large, as India manages strained relations and a simmering border dispute with Beijing. Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping famously declared a “no limits” partnership on the eve of Russia’s invasion, but Indian policymakers expect Moscow to treat their country as off-limits, based on India’s steadfast refusal to abandon Russia and a legacy of strategic cooperation.
India’s unsentimental pursuit of its national interest hasn’t yet come at the expense of its relationships with western democracies. Strategic partnership with India is so valued that nations are ultimately willing to overlook Delhi’s lukewarm support of the rules-based international order.
In Tokyo last month, Joe Biden declared his commitment “to making the US-India partnership among the closest we have on earth.” His administration remains reluctant to sanction India under the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act (CAATSA) for purchasing Russia’s S-400 surface-to-air missile defence system. To decrease Indian reliance on Russian arms supplies, Washington appears poised to accelerate defence sales and enable indigenisation, reportedly preparing a $500-million package in military financing to India.
Taken together, these developments suggest India has played its cards skillfully. But can the surprising results last?
Whether or not India can continue to reap the benefits of studied neutrality hinges on several critical assumptions. First, a shared preoccupation with China will continue to smoothen relations with the West, engendering empathy for Delhi’s Ukraine policy. Second, post-war Russia will remain a major power with agency in India-related security matters that touch on Chinese interests. Third, relatedly, Delhi’s accommodation of Ukraine can arrest Moscow’s increasing tilt toward Beijing.
While the first assumption is on solid ground, the last two are less so.
Successive US administrations now view India as central to balancing China’s power and shaping Beijing’s external environment. India earned more mentions than any country in the Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific Strategy released this February. A bipartisan consensus favours a tough-minded approach to China with Congress consistently urging a harder edge.
Europe is increasingly aligned with the US on China — a shift aided by Beijing’s war-time backing of Moscow. The EU’s foreign policy chief dismissed a contentious EU-China summit this spring as a “dialogue of the deaf.” Despite India’s differences with the EU over the bloodiest fighting in Europe since 1945, Modi’s travel to Germany, Denmark, and France was nevertheless regarded as the building on pre-existing momentum.
The problem is that Russia’s utility in helping India deal with China (or Pakistan) is diminishing daily. The war increasingly appears headed towards an enervating stalemate. The fighting will likely continue for now, with neither Russia nor Ukraine satisfied with the current facts on the ground. Biden is intent on ensuring Russia pays “a heavy price for its actions.” Meanwhile, influential western voices are calling for Russia’s outright defeat to produce “a weak, isolated country.”
Already, Putin’s war has resulted in ruinous economic consequences for Russia: Soaring inflation, economic contraction, and a mass exodus of technology workers. Even accounting for its improved showing in Ukraine’s east, Russia’s military has struggled mightily. Before Moscow resumes being a reliable military supplier to Delhi, it will probably need to replace thousands of destroyed pieces of battlefield equipment. Last month, India halted talks with Russia to acquire early warning helicopters due to supply uncertainties. The bad news for Russia — and India — is that export controls are just beginning to bite. As long as Putin stays in power, Moscow will likely face restrictions on high technology trade and investment.
As the war grinds on, the likelihood of a diminished Russia consigned to being China’s junior partner grows. Even if the conflict is somehow brought to a swift conclusion, Moscow will desperately need Beijing to brighten a bleak strategic and economic outlook. That will come with conditions attached that should give Delhi pause. Despite their fraught history, Russia may conclude only China is capable of stepping in to meet its growing needs. In a future India-China crisis, Russia’s ability to exert a positive influence on China will be limited.
India’s cold-eyed diplomacy on Ukraine has arguably served its interests until now, but Russia’s deteriorating condition and growing reliance on China point to it soon outliving its usefulness.
Atman M Trivedi is senior vice-president at the Albright Stonebridge Group, part of Dentons Global Advisors. He has worked at the US state department, the US commerce department, and on the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Rhone Grajcar is an intern at ASG. The views expressed are personal
When the Pradhan Mantri Ujjwala Yojana (PMUY) was launched in 2016, under the leadership of Prime Minister (PM) Narendra Modi, our greatest challenge was reaching the last woman in the remotest recesses of India with liquefied petroleum gas cylinders. With a dedicated workforce and political will, the PMUY’s success has given me confidence that we will be able to undertake the challenging task of implementing the new National Education Policy (NEP) 2020, too.
India is one of the youngest countries in the world, with more than 50% of the population below 30. But concerted efforts and policy interventions are required to translate this demographic potential into a dividend. Some experts suggest that India will be an ageing society by 2050, with nearly 20% of the population above 60 years. So, we have a little more than two decades to tap the potential of the youth, or what PM Modi refers to as the Amrit Kaal, the 25 years leading up to the 100th year of Independence. Hence, we need to overhaul the system to cater to the needs and aspirations of our young people. NEP 2020 is one such transformation in the nation’s journey. In the words of PM Modi, NEP 2020 will serve as the foundation of an Atmanirbhar Bharat (a self-reliant India).
NEP 2020 restructures our education ecosystem: From pre-primary to higher education, and also reconfigures the system with skills and a research ecosystem. It stands on the four principles of access, quality, equity, and affordability. It aims to enhance the gross enrolment ratio in higher education to 50% by 2035 from the current level of 27.1% by instituting the Higher Education Commission of India (HECI) — a single regulatory body in place of the University Grants Commission (UGC). It will ensure that independent and empowered bodies will execute regulation, accreditation, funding, and academic standard-setting. Some of the many progressive recommendations in NEP include: Experiential learning at all stages, innovative and activity-based pedagogies, multiple entry/exit options in higher education, multidisciplinary education, and establishing an academic bank of credit. There is also much emphasis on the internationalisation of education and study in India programmes with corresponding policy reforms to accommodate these sweeping changes.
NEP 2020 also recognises immediate challenges. It calls for urgently ensuring that every student attains foundational literacy and numeracy by Class 3. The national mission on foundational literacy and numeracy, NIPUN Bharat, has been launched so that every child achieves foundational literacy and numeracy by class 3 by 2026-27.
It calls for governments at all levels to ensure that the medium of instruction up to at least Class 5 is in the mother tongue or local language for improving the learning process. Our government also focuses on local languages in higher education because it considers all languages as national languages. More than 200 technical books in local languages at the undergraduate level and for diploma courses have been launched. The government is trying to promote textbooks in engineering, medicine, and law in local and official languages. Efforts are being made to make entrance examinations available in all major languages.
We need to restore the high respect and status of the profession to inspire and motivate our teachers. Our government is focusing on providing opportunities for self-improvement and continuous professional development. Not only in school education, but the faculty of our colleges and universities shall also learn about the latest technologies and innovations and different forms of pedagogies. We are building world-class centres for teacher training. The current budget has also made provisions for digital teachers with an allocation of ₹6 crore.
The last two years have been unprecedented due to the pandemic and unexpected geopolitical events. However, the positive part is that this challenging time has given birth to innovations. A number of innovative models came up during the pandemic. Based on the principle that technology is an equaliser and enabler, the Union Budget made provisions for 200 new TV channels for education dissemination, allocating about ₹930 crore in five years.
Emergent technologies such as Artificial Intelligence, robotics and automation provide ample opportunities and challenges, because scores of traditional jobs may fade away. But it will also bring roles more adapted to a new division of labour between humans, machines, and algorithms. Hence, the window of opportunity to reskill and upskill workers has become shorter, and one must act now to train the vast chunk of the youth.
The 21st century is a century of knowledge. India as one of the oldest civilisations and knowledge societies, has a natural advantage in becoming a “captain” in navigating emerging economies toward a prosperous future. I believe after the Constitution, NEP 2020 is one document which has been shaped after multiple levels of deliberations, discussions, and participatory dialogues across the country. Like the Constitution, NEP 2020 will lead us out of decades of dilemma and doubt and inculcate a deep-rooted pride in being Indian in thought, spirit, intellect, and deeds. It integrates students, teachers, parents, and society for holistic development and achieving their full human potential.
Our youth aspires to work as not just job-seekers but job-creators as well. If we can provide them with quality knowledge and skills, we will be able to make India the vishwaguru (world leader) our freedom fighters dreamt of. NEP 2020 is engendered to do just that. This will be our contribution to nation-building, as we mark 75 years of Independence.
Dharmendra Pradhan is Union minister of education and skill development and entrepreneurshipThe views expressed are personal
This, the 75th year of India’s Independence, is the year of the Tricolour. As our flag unfurls, our minds awaken; as it flutters, our hearts miss or gain a beat. And images come to us of our leaders, the likes of whom the world has not known.
But our leaders could not have led, our movements could not have worked, our struggle for freedom could not have triumphed without the people of India. When , after the success of the South African satyagraha, Gandhi and his wife Kasturba were being felicitated in London on August 4, 1914, he said, “We… got the limelight in South Africa but if we merited any approbation, how much more did those who went into the struggle with no thought of appreciation! Harbut Singh was 75 when he joined the struggle and entered prison and died there. The young lad Narayanaswami was deported to Madras and on his return, starved and died....And Valliamma, a girl of 18 went to prison and was discharged only when she took very ill and died shortly thereafter. Twenty thousand workers had left their tools and work and gone out in faith. Violence was entirely eschewed. We are poor mortals before these heroes and heroines.” And he added, “It is on these men and women, who are the salt of the earth that the Indian nation will be built.” Among those listening were persons of present and future fame — Lala Lajpat Rai , Sachchinanda Sinha and Bhupendranath Basu, Sarojini Naidu and MA Jinnah. To all of them, his message about who the real heroes and heroines of the struggle were, went home.
This jubilee year, this year of collective recalling and celebrating, is, therefore, not just about the leaders but about those who made the leaders, powered the movements, gave the struggle its voltage, velocity and — victory. It is about those heroes and heroines, the salt of the earth to whom we owe our freedom, our opportunities, our achievements in the gift of freedom that they have given us. When we falter, fail and go wrong, when our faith wavers and our covenants with our political conscience fray, we let down not just the great Swami, our beloved Vivekananda, the Lokamanya, our cherished Bal Gangadhar Tilak, our Mahatma, our valiant Jawahar whom Tagore described as “the tarun tapasvi”, our indomitable and only one such Sardar Patel, the scholar-nationalist Maulana Azad, our immortal Shaheed Bhagat Singh, our brilliant law-giver, Babasaheb Ambedkar, not just them, but we betray the salt of our earth, of India. The salt satyagraha of 1930 along the coast of Gujarat, which shook the British Raj as nothing else had, therefore, more than the accident of a catchy idea — salt. It was a recognition of the metaphoric salt. The salt of our earth, the masses that make the peoplehood of India.
This year is also the 80th anniversary of the Quit India Movement of 1942. Just as 1857, the year of the First War of Independence, is an unforgettable year, so is 1942. It was on August 8, that the great call to the Raj to quit India was given by the leaders of India, speaking on behalf of its heroes and heroines. At the iconic meeting held in Bombay, the salt of India’s earth spoke through its spokespersons — Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Azad, Kripalani. And the Raj shook. The entire leadership was arrested overnight. Gandhi, with Kasturba, was jailed in Poona. Nehru, Patel, Azad, Kripalani, Asaf Ali, Gobind Ballabh Pant, Shankarrao Deo, the Oriya leader Harekrushna Mahtab, Pattabhi Sitaramayya were locked up in Ahmednagar Fort. Not for a few days or months but for three years. Kasturba died while in that prison. Azad lost his wife, Zuleikha, while he was in jail.
But these were “specifics” before the bigger, larger, and overwhelming truth: Tens of thousands were arrested arrests were made, mass fines were levied and innumerable real heroes and heroines subjected to public flogging during that movement. It is their sacrifice, purity and hope that we celebrate this year. Their ardour, their sense of duty to India. This year, therefore, is a year of the Tricolour at its most fluent, its truest vibrancy. How are the people of struggling India to be honoured by the people of liberated India? By seeing this anniversary as more than a celebration of the past. By seeing it, to adapt a phrase from Abraham Lincoln, as a consecration of the present for the greatness of our future — in equity and freedom.
Gopalkrishna Gandhi is a former administrator, diplomat and governorThe views expressed are personal
Writer Sujatha’s short story, Karuppu Kuthirai (Black Horse), which is also the title of his anthology of 12 short stories, is about cricket match-fixing, written when nothing of the sort was known.
These short stories were written in 1995 for the Tamil weekly magazine, Anandha Vikatan, under the title Puthiya Thoondil Kathaikal (New Bait Stories), and were together published later, as an anthology, in 2000. In the same year, when the India-South Africa match-fixing scandal erupted, the author wrote about his surprise at how he had written about the issue long before it was considered a big phenomenon in cricket and other sports.
I am not fond of cricket, and perhaps that is why that story didn't quite appeal to me. But that the author wrote about something that didn't have a name in popular culture holds lessons for society — that evolution and change are inevitable, and in cases of social transformations (and definitely not match-fixing), we must make room for it. There was, for instance, a time when the queer (LGBTQIA+) community didn't have a name of its own, but here we are today.
What stuck with me years after reading it, however, is another short story in the same book, about two men working together in managerial positions. The end of the story insinuates that both men were in a sexual relationship, as suspected by a co-worker.
This story stayed with me for several reasons: Before this, I had only read news reports about homosexual men involved in crimes or pocket novels which carried curious and scandalous write-ups about male sex workers who cater to other men.
This short story wasn’t exactly positive about the same-sex relationship between the two co-workers, but the shock element, the surprise twist, the "bait", was what caught my eye. However, knowing that it was written by a popular writer made me think that people perhaps knew men like me in their everyday lives, working in offices, while some lead a life of secrecy, because of prevailing social conditions.
Then and now
Historically, South Asian texts, irrespective of language, have elements of queerness in them — intentionally and unintentionally. But many literary works have used queerness as an element of shock, ridicule, or disgust. It reflected the social attitude and hatred towards queer persons.
Today, things have changed. While there are writers who capture same-sex desire beyond hate and disgust, others often don't. For instance, Sri Lanka-born writer and actor Shobasakthi’s short story Kaaythal (Waiting) from his 2003 collection Thesathurogi (Anti-national) is a story about two Tamil men, displaced by the civil war in Sri Lanka, who live in Paris.
The story captures their complicated relationship away from the homeland, with undertones of disgust. However, as a reader, the disgust is of the character in the story, and not of the author himself. Later, I met and interacted with the author about Kaaythal at the 2021 Chennai Queer Literature Fest, where he shared his thoughts, the context of the story, and his journey in understanding the queer community.
This conversation with writer Shobasakthi, from a queer perspective, on a queer platform, is important. It was an opportunity for many to talk about his literary work from the prism of queerness, which often finds no space on other platforms.
What is queer literature?
In early 2018, when writer Violet and I brainstormed about organising a literature festival, with a focus on queer literature and queer authors, we had many questions: What is queer literature? Are works by queer-identified authors "queer literature", even if they do not have socially-expected queerness in them? Can works by non-queer authors with queer characters in them be considered queer literature? Or are works that defy the normative, "queer"?
These are complex questions, the answers to which I still do not have. But we have had four editions of the Chennai Queer LitFest so far. The journey made me realise that even though the festival is called the "Queer LitFest", and we do indeed prioritise the literary works of queer-identified authors, it is a festival for everyone. What started as a festival to establish our existence and be vocal about our works has become a space where everybody has something to learn, and unlearn.
The queer literature fest is also a necessary platform in today's world, to highlight the oft-unseen works of the queer commuunity, of writers and artists whose identity is crucial to their art. The fest is meant to provide queer artists with the platform they need to: A) be unabashedly themselves, B) promote their art, and C) not be boxed in, as “just another LGBTQIA+ writer”. This gives them the room that they need to move beyond a singular identity — of being queer — to embrace the various identities that they possess — as artists and writers.
A queer perspective
The question of authenticity in stories is also important. Literature — both fiction and non-fiction — is a form of documentation of the people who lived in certain times, real or imagined. This is where the political argument about who tells the story comes in, to ensure that the voices of the community are not overshadowed by those who may choose to appropriate their lived experiences. It would do us well to remember that the queer community is as diverse as the society that it inhabits, and so their space — in literature and art — is integral.
This is because we do not share the same experiences. Therefore, it is when stories are told by us that we bring in our unique perspectives and experience and create a narrative of our own. In telling our own stories, in building our own narratives, and in creating our own characters, we help people understand more about their neighbours or family members, adding to the character of the land we all live in.
Over the four years, we have had discussions on various topics: Publishing, media representation, oral history, storytelling, mythology, inclusive children's literature, and so on. These discussions have had a healthy mix of writers, translators, and publishers who identify as queer persons and allies.
However, while they bring in their own perspectives on the queer community, it begs reiteration that queer literature does not exclude those who are not from the community.
While story-writers must be true to the experiences of the community, it is as important for people outside of the community — when they write queer literature — to represent it accurately, with sensitivity and compassion for a marginalised community. This is where mainstream literary festivals fail. Their lack of inclusion or their need to box LGBTQIA+ writers of different genres into one category (of just being queer) is fundamentally problematic. This, in simple words, is not inclusion — it is tokenism.
Sujatha’s short story in the 90s wasn’t particularly homophobic. It reflects the time that the story was written, and he has since passed away. And I would never know the conversation that happened around that story. And if there was a conversation, I am almost certain that there was no seat at the table for a queer person to share their opinion about it.
Today, however, we are making room to have such discussions. Queer festivals and events enable them. As we move forward, we need more publishers and editors who understand the nuances of writings by queer authors.
After all, fiction and non-fican, and must, make room for everybody.
C Moulee is the founder of Queer Chennai Chronicles (QCC), an independent publishing house and literary forum based in Chennai. QCC is also the organiser of India’s first queer literature festival: Chennai Queer LitFest. Moulee juggles between his corporate consultant job as a diversity, equity and inclusion strategist and as a queer cultural curator and publisher
This is part of a special HT Premium series, spanning personal essays, reportage and analyses, to mark Pride Month
The views expressed are personal
February 2008 was abuzz with excitement for investors in India. Reliance Power was the talk of the town, collecting a record sum of ₹11,563 crores for its mega intial public offering (IPO). The topic of Reliance Power was the basis for water cooler talk, with everyone from taxi drivers to paanwalas giving their unsolicited opinions on it, promoting the idea of its IPO, and even going as far as to say that if you miss out on it, you’re an idiot.
And then it all came tumbling down. Listed with a lot of fanfare, the IPO of RPower was subscribed by more than 72 times, with bids worth more than ₹7 lakh crore. However, with the global markets being in a state of morosity and for other reasons, the Indian stock markets were badly hit. In a single day, billions of investors’ money were done for. That listing cemented the idea that the brand name just isn’t enough, you need to have some solid fundamentals. Irrational exuberance may not be able to sustain the markets. FOMO (fear of missing out) is real and it may destroy your portfolio. Bubbles tend to burst due to overvaluation and overestimation.
That’s fitting to keep in mind, considering how crypto has many of us enticed and enamoured. The Wild Wild West is what the crypto industry seems to be all about these days. The carnage is not a tiny fire in the middle of nowhere. It’s a whole rainforest being taken out, with market sentiments drastically changing amid a recession, geopolitical crises, rising inflation, uncertainty in financial markets, cyclical industries, and a pandemic. Factor in the regulatory hostility towards cryptocurrency and it doesn't get any better. Crypto enterprise Coinbase rescinded job offers and laid off more than 1,000 employees. Layoffs also happened at BlockFi, Bybit, Gemini, Vauld, Buenbit, Crypto.com, Bitso and Bitpanda, among others. That's interesting, considering how these crypto startups were once the apple of Venture Capitals’ eyes, who showered them with affection and funding.
As of June 2022, Bitcoin has fallen to about $18,000 apiece. That’s a big plummet, considering the fact that, in November 2021, it was about $66,000. That’s about a 70% fall in eight months. When the price of Bitcoin goes up, many folks start partying and it’s almost like a pyramid scheme with people bringing in more people to invest in the ecosystem. And when there’s a plummet, it’s the layperson who is left picking up the pieces.
So, what’s with people not learning from history? What’s the deal with people not fully understanding the risks and rewards and crypto startups flying too close to the sun? Because just like before, when you hear the layperson talk about the next big asset when there’s still a significant information asymmetry, you know it’s time to worry about the next bubble building. But was the excitement built to soar?
Some believe crypto startups may not be able to survive such a substantial downturn. The crypto winters of yore were much smaller, but this new one came after a time when crypto was made in a much more mainstream place, even having celebs like Matthew Damon, Lawrence David, Kim Kardashian, LeBron James, and Tom Brady endorsing the digital asset. That means it would be much harder for crypto startups to rise like a phoenix and this crypto winter may just be a crypto ice age: Collision course.
And yet, not everyone is so pessimistic. You still have the cognoscenti say, “It’s just a phase”, as if to excuse the histrionics of a belligerent teenager. According to them, oscillating between penury and exuberance is the way of the world for crypto and it’s only going to propel innovation during this bear market, instead of all-out annihilation. Experts draw a comparison to the dot-com bubble to say that this Web 3.0 crisis will only reveal who the champion startups are, the way Amazon and eBay rose to the top, even after the crisis of the 2000s. All in all, the FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt) is high right now, just like the “josh”.
Whether the market can correct itself for crypto startups to continue to succeed is something that can only be speculated. Some are outright rejecting that idea, some believe a major revolution could be born out of this and this is just a bump in the road. It’s a good time for those fledglings with more solid ground to stand on to figure out whether they can be resilient and antifragile and whether they can withstand harsh realities to evolve. The rest may be poised to slowly disintegrate if they don’t have a leg to stand on and if they can’t fulfill their promises.
If crypto startups are the canary in the coal mine, so be it. Because it serves as an expensive lesson for people to understand it’s not prudent to leap without not looking. The “hot startup”, on its own, is quite superficial. It needs more substance to back it up. They’re essentially sirens, just like in Greek mythology, and that ought to make your sirens go off.
Today, one sector is hot and suddenly, it's a has-been. So crypto startup founders need to better understand what kind of company they can build and if it doesn't follow the trajectory they expected it to, whether it can still sustain and thrive, not just survive. Ask yourself what the fundamentals of your company are and what can it withstand. Dip your toe in the pool, see if it’s to your liking and make sure you know all the facts and that you know what you’re getting into. Only then, you are ready to make a splash.
Shrija Agrawal is a business journalist who has covered startups and private capital markets before it was considered cool in India
The views expressed are personal
A gender-reversing Chinese fantasy drama, The Romance of Tiger and Rose, notched up high viewership on television and a huge response online in China in 2020.
A 14-episode period drama, it imagined life in a Chinese city with a twist – it showed a matriarchal society where women ruled and men dreamed of being courted by a princess charming and settling down to a life of domestic bliss. Or reconciliation.
According to the Sixth Tone website, the series had a combined 580 million views until the end of May 2020, and “…a related hashtag on the microblogging platform Weibo” was viewed “more than 3 billion times”.
Cut to Tangshan, a city some 100 km from Beijing, two years later.
A graphic video — taken from surveillance footage and mobile phone recordings of witnesses — showing women, one in particular, being repeatedly kicked and punched by a group of men at a barbeque shop in the early hours of June 10 in Tangshan city triggered a wave of fury across China.
Fantasy drama had been rudely pushed aside by reality footage.
Why were the women assaulted?
Because one of them – the one targeted most viciously – stood up in protest when one man, a boss-type in the pack of men involved in the assault, touched her in a sly attempt at harassment – as if it was his right to do so.
Except, it wasn’t. The woman told him so. Angrily.
What he and his cronies did next wasn’t their right either.
The protesting woman was dragged out of the restaurant — in a way considered most humiliating — by her hair; outside, the kicking and punching continued as she lay on the road crumpled like a piece of cloth. Shocked passers-by looked on. Women tried to help, but were stopped by their male companions. Many took videos.
Soon, the videos went online and viral. So did the outrage.
At first, Chinese official media reports on the assault mentioned gender violence.
“Even at a time when male violence against women has regularly made headlines in China, the video — which appeared on the Chinese internet yesterday and instantly went viral — struck a chord with many Chinese women,” the State-run China Daily newspaper reported on June 11.
The report added that the brazenness of the attack, and the indifference of the bystanders, “…unleashed a renewed wave of fear and fury among them, prompting them to take to social media to call for an end to what they described as ‘an epidemic of gender-based violence in the country.”
There were reasons for the footage to go viral.
For one, many who commented online thought that kind of assault could happen to anyone, anywhere — it took place at a restaurant where couples, friends, families, everyone went; that it took place within the range of functional CCTVs and under the glare of mobile phones worried them even more.
One user on Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, said the incident, which reflected the vulnerabilities of women, crossed a moral line.
Soon the tone in State-run Chinese media changed: Articles continued to condemn the incident, but began to call it a case of gang violence and not a case of crime against women, not as an example of a man’s sense of entitlement.
Here’s an example of Chinese State media’s twist to the tale:
“The series of recent grievous incidents hit a raw nerve of the public when they happened against the background of a national campaign of cracking down on gang crimes. Many people questioned why the law lost its deterrent in Tangshan,” said the tabloid, Global Times.
The focus of the mainstream narrative changed to link the incident to gang-related crimes and how the prime suspect, Chen Jiezhi, had a criminal record.
The narrative explained it as a public security incident. Which it was. But it was much more: It was an example of a criminal attack by a man who attempted to sexually harass a woman, a clear case of gender violence.
“The problem, according to this state-backed narrative, is less gender-based violence than lax public security and the lingering influence of ‘black society,’ a catch-all term for criminal elements and a target of the now concluded 'Sweep Away Black and Eliminate Evil' campaign,” wrote China Digital Times, a website that tracks China.
The reason why the Tangshan assault case was reduced to only a law and order slip-up could be an insidious one – give less space to voices talking and debating about gender violence in China.
“The government denies that this is a gender violence issue. The purpose of downplaying the gender perspective is arguably to avoid giving legitimacy to feminist discourse,” Lu Pin, a US-based feminist activist, who founded the influential communication platform Feminist Voices in China, said.
“Feminist discourse is mobilising and accountable, so it is unpopular with the government and is being delegitimised. It is also to absolve the government of its inaction on gender violence and to use the opportunity to reassert the power of authoritarianism,” Lu added.
About two weeks into the incident, Tangshan’s “National Civilised City” status, a high-sounding award handed out by the ruling Community Party of China's propaganda department, was withdrawn.
“The honour of a civilised city belongs to all citizens and cannot be smeared or desecrated. All sectors of the society should cherish and jointly protect the goodwill of civilisation and the warmth of the city,” State-backed daily China City News, said, according to the South China Morning Post (SCMP).
(In all, 290 of China’s 600 cities, districts, and towns had won the much sought-after title as of last October, the SCMP report added).
Withdrawing a fairly meaningless tag, arresting the suspects, and the launch of a campaign against criminals in Tangshan followed the assault. Commendable, surely. But the more civilised way to deal with the aftermath of the incident would have been to allow discussions on gender violence in China to play out across platforms and not try to manipulate or censor it.
As Lu, quoted earlier, explained, due to issues such as censorship, there is a growing lack of public discourse in China that is not dominated and manipulated by the government.
“On the one hand, voices concerned with gender violence want to take the opportunity (following the assault case) to raise the issue and gain legitimacy as well as visibility that is not generally available; on the other hand, there are voices that downplay or deny gender violence.”
“Clearly the latter is stronger. And the former is angry, fragmented and vulnerable, easily censored and not allowed to be associated with advocacy and action,” she said.
It seems fans are eagerly waiting for the second season of the fantasy drama The Romance of Tiger and Rose. In a world of brazen misogyny, a 45-minute daily break from reality should be fine.
Sutirtho Patranobis, HT’s experienced China hand, writes a weekly column from Beijing, exclusively for HT Premium readers. He was previously posted in Colombo, Sri Lanka, where he covered the final phase of the civil war and its aftermath, and was based in Delhi for several years before that
The views expressed are personal
At 2.6 million cases, India has the highest burden of Tuberculosis (TB) in the world, accounting for at least one-fourth of the global cases. The just released National TB Prevalence in India Report (2019-21) also suggests that the prevalence of microbiologically confirmed TB among those 15 years and above of age in India is 316:100,000 population. The highest Pulmonary TB prevalence of 534:100,000 is in Delhi, and the lowest of 115:100,000 in Kerala.
TB has been one of the biggest public health challenges in India. However, India is committed to end TB by 2025 — ahead of the year 2030 — the target set under the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This, despite the set-backs due to the coronavirus pandemic that derailed the health care system in the country and across the globe.
The TB National Strategic Plan (NSP) 2020-2025 is an endorsement of the government’s re-doubled commitment to make India TB-free by 2025. The new NSP provides a new set of goals that will accelerate the national response to TB elimination. The key interventions highlighted in the NSP include population screening for TB, high standard of care in private sector, achieving high rates of treatment success, and the use of technology for diagnosis.
TB is not only a public health issue. It is also strongly linked to socio-economic development, nutrition, and lifestyle. There is deep social stigma attached to the disease resulting in discrimination, social rejection as well as a loss of livelihood. Driven by the factors that are beyond the scope of health alone, eliminating TB from the country, hence, calls for enhanced commitment, investment, and collaboration.
India has made impressive strides in bringing down TB-related mortality and infection rates over the years. However, considering the diversity and variation in the burden of disease, there is a need for active engagement of non-traditional stakeholders such as corporations, civil society, young people, community-based organisations (CBOs), and community members, all of which can play a critical role in winning the battle against TB.
This year’s theme, “Invest to End TB; Save Lives” calls for the need to invest in the fight to end TB. This will have to be not only financial but by way of human resource as well. While we have seen an overwhelming political commitment at the highest level, there is need to strengthen existing partnership and build new ones. Adopting innovative initiatives and success stories from different states that have been able to bring down the disease prevalence could be one way to overcome TB.
Technology has been used extensively for surveillance, diagnosis, treatment, and monitoring, but we have also seen some very successful initiatives by various State governments such as adoption of more than 38,000 pediatric TB patients in Uttar Pradesh by the Governor, government officials and corporate houses to provide them support and prevent stigma and discrimination. In Bihar, TB elimination has been taken up as a Jan Andolan on the lines of Poshan Abhiyan while in Karnataka, Kshay Rog Mukt Gram Panchayats (TB Free Gram Panchayats) are being encouraged to involve the elected representatives in TB elimination at the grassroots level. Learning from and replicating successful initiatives can be another way of dealing with the disease. Chhattisgarh was the first state to introduce nutrition for TB patients, and this initiative is included in the National Tuberculosis Elimination Programme.
Another major challenge faced by the national program is the lack of health-seeking behaviour of the population that creates a high risk of transmission. Patients with undiagnosed TB act as reservoirs for the disease. The National TB Prevalence in India Report points out that a majority 63.6% of TB patients did not seek care for their symptoms. There are about 400,000 missing TB cases annually who pose a serious threat to the society. Delay in the diagnosis and dropping out of treatment may worsen the disease condition, increase the out-of-pocket expenditure, and also increase the risk of TB transmission in the community.
Considering this scenario, investments and resources need to be targeted for high burden states, and high-risk groups, with greater emphasis on health education and advocacy to increase awareness among the community. Here, training and using champions to eliminate stigma and discrimination, and engaging with the community by setting up TB Forums and Patient Support Groups will go a long way in awareness generation.
A significant investment of financial and human resources would be required to capacitate young people, making them “change agents” using technology as an enabler. Training TB survivors as champions and launching IEC campaigns by involving celebrities do leave an impact as we have seen in the case of Polio Campaign and mental health after well-known movie stars associated themselves with these two public health campaigns. We already have campaigns such as `Be the Change for TB’ and some more with powerful messages can bring about the change in people.
Advances in technology is being leveraged for rapid and accurate diagnosis, treatment adherence, IEC activities, training of community volunteers and staff. In addition, AI tools are also being explored in many areas.
But, this cannot be done by the government alone. Multi-sectoral partnerships can help in leveraging strengths and synergies and using technology for improved surveillance to address the issue of missing cases. Partnerships can help to build capacities of medical practitioners and healthcare workers to deal with TB patients.
If the goal of making India TB Free by 2025 is to be achieved, a solution-driven approach would be required to bring multiple stakeholders together for collaborative action against tuberculosis. Limiting the stakeholder contribution to monetary investment is not enough to free India of TB. Complementing actions would also be required to invest time, effort, and commitment from all stakeholders.
Dr Rajendra P Joshi is deputy director general (TB), Central TB Division
The views expressed are personl
Lucknow: There are several reasons why the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) took the bypolls to Azamgarh and Rampur Lok Sabha seats in Uttar Pradesh (UP) seriously.
First, the BJP contests every election — from the village panchayat to the country’s top constitutional position of President — as a veritable ground for its political puissance and power.
Second, both Rampur in West and Azamgarh in East UP are Muslim-dominated constituencies, where it could test its controversial 80:20 formula in the by-elections. It was during the 2022 assembly polls that chief minister (CM) Yogi Adityanath triggered a controversy by describing it as an “80% vs 20% election”, stating that 80% of the progressive supporters would back the BJP, while 20%, who opposed the BJP in the past, would oppose them in the future too.
Immediately, 80-20 was seen from the prism of communal politics in the state — 80% Hindus and 20% Muslims. He later denied the communal parallel drawn by his detractors, stating he had not said it in the context of religion or caste. But, by then, the message had reverberated across UP, loud and clear.
Thus, when the BJP won both the Azamgarh and Rampur Lok Sabha bypolls, the tweet by party national general secretary BL Santhosh smartly worded the victory as: “History being made. The death knell to communal, divisive, minority appeasement politics. The mandate for Politics of Vikas practised by PM Narendra Modi and CM Yogi Adityanath.” Interestingly, ending the divisive politics was the plank of Samajwadi Party (SP) leader Mohd Azam Khan, who largely shouldered the responsibility of campaigning in both constituencies.
That the BJP was determined to win the two seats was also reflected in the chief minister's comment, “It's a historic win reflecting the confidence of the people in the welfare policies of the double-engine government.”
Finally, the BJP has tested the 80-20 formula.
Both Azamgarh and Rampur are Muslim-dominated constituencies, which the BJP has been struggling to snatch from the Opposition parties.
The loss of Azamgarh is a major jolt to the SP, whose founder-president Mulayam Singh Yadav and national president Akhilesh Yadav won despite the Modi wave in 2014 and 2019. This time, Akhilesh’s cousin and former Badaun Member of Parliament (MP) Dharmendra Yadav was in the fray in a bid to retain the family seat. He lost the seat by a mere margin of 8,679 votes.
The loss has many factors. But mainly the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), which fielded a local Muslim candidate supposedly to divide the minority votes and oblige the BJP. Mayawati succeeded in her mission as her party candidate Shah Alam Guddu Jamal took away a major slice of over 2.66 lakh votes against 3.12 lakh votes in favour of the winning BJP nominee Dinesh Lal Yadav Nirahua, Bhojpuri actor and singer, and 3.04 lakh votes to SP candidate Dharmendra Yadav.
Though the BSP candidate strongly refuted the charge that he was a dummy candidate to bail out the BJP in a prestige battle, the fact is that Mayawati, in the past, has not only avoided contesting by-polls, but had also decided not to fight for the Rampur seat. Jamali, the BSP candidate, divided the Muslim vote as he was a local candidate, accessible to the people, whereas Dharmendra Yadav had flown there from his home in the West.
In Rampur, it is a personal setback for the party’s co-founder-leader and Muslim face Mohd Azam Khan, who had last come out of jail on May 20 after spending about 27 months, in about 100 FIRs lodged against him by Yogi Adityanath government, but failed to elicit sympathy votes. Surprisingly, he was wooed by all the Opposition parties — the Congress, BSP, Pragatisheel Samajwadi Party (PSP) of Shivpal Singh Yadav — after the end of his incarceration.
Why the BJP won
It was a matter of prestige for the BJP to win both seats. Led by Yogi, the party left no stone unturned in wresting the seats, SP chief Akhilesh Yadav did not address even one public rally, though he did micromanage from Lucknow.
The SP complained of the police playing a foul game, terrorising voters in their strong areas and dispatched a missive to the Election Commission, but then, as it is said in love and war, “Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander.”
And both the victories are special. Here is why.
Azamgarh, also known as a land of socialists, has been an Opposition citadel with the SP winning the Lok Sabha seat five times, the BSP thrice, and the Janata Dal once since 1989. The BJP had won it only once in 2009 when local strongman and former MP Ramakant Yadav, who fought elections on both SP and BSP tickets, shifted to the BJP. The Congress won it once in 1984.
Barring 1984, when a Rajput had won the seat on a Congress ticket, it was either a Muslim or a Yadav who has won all the elections in Azamgarh. The 1984 Lok Sabha elections were held soon after the assassination of the then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Of the 18 lakh voters in Azamgarh, Muslims and Yadavs alone account for 3.5 lakh each, while Dalits are about 4 lakhs. Thus, the M-Y (Muslim-Yadav) and D-M (Dalit-Muslim) combinations have generally won the polls as the three communities are perceived to go en bloc.
The Rampur story is different. Unlike Azamgarh where M-Y or M-D combine helped the Opposition parties, Rampur is primarily dominated by Muslims who account for almost 45-50% of the electorate. The BJP had fielded Ghanshyam Singh Lodhi, from the second dominant caste. Lodhi had contested the 2009 elections on a BSP ticket and had suffered defeat. Later, he joined the SP and became the right hand of Azam Khan. However, ahead of the 2022 polls, Lodhi joined the BJP. While he believes his support base in all castes and communities paid him dividends in the election, the SP candidate Mohammad Asim Raza, a close aide of Azam Khan, claims he lost the seat because of a “misuse of official machinery”.
Because of the famous Nawab family of Rampur, the Congress continued to hold its influence even after the party started disappearing from the state in 1989. It alternately won the seat with the BJP in four elections — 1991 the BJP, 1996 the Congress, 1998 the BJP, and 1999 again, the Congress. Thereafter, the SP made inroads and won two consecutive elections in 2004 and 2009, even though the BJP had fielded Bollywood actress Jaya Prada. Again, the SP lost the seat to the BJP in 2014 only to win it back in 2019. Mohd Azam Khan was elected to the Lok Sabha three years ago, but he decided to retain the Rampur assembly seat that he won in the 2022 assembly elections. Azam campaigned extensively not only in Rampur, but also in Azamgarh.
Thus, a question will also be raised on Azam's influence over Muslim votes as his identity is crucial and is what keeps him in demand.
The main Opposition party, the SP, gets a major setback, but then, as they say, the by-polls generally go in favour of the ruling party.
As for the BJP, yet another win adds to their victory record beginning in 2014.
From her perch in Lucknow, HT’s resident editor Sunita Aron highlights important issues related to Uttar Pradesh
The views expressed are personal
The results of the byelections held in three Lok Sabha constituencies, especially the two in the politically significant state of Uttar Pradesh, reflect the political reality of our times: An Opposition which has lost its focus and hardly has a narrative to present before the people and the ruling party which not only consolidates its own strongholds and vote banks but also uses every opportunity to encroach on the enemy territory and expand its base to reap electoral gains.
Uttar Pradesh sends 80 members to the 542-member Lok Sabha, and hence every signal that emanates from there is politically important. Its polity has been in a flux for over three decades and now appears to have evolved into a bipartisan one with the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the Samajwadi Party (SP) claiming the focus, relegating all others including the Congress and the BSP, to the shade. And both the players have created their own vote base.
The Rampur and Azamgarh Lok Sabha constituencies are considered strongholds of the SP because of the presence of the party’s traditional vote banks in full strength. The Azamgarh seat fell vacant after SP chief Akhilesh Yadav, who represented it, chose to vacate it after being elected to the state assembly, while the Rampur seat was vacated by Azam Khan, who too entered the Assembly. The big loss in both constituencies to the BJP offers reasons for the SP to open itself to the reality that its opponent has been able to identify its fault lines even in its strongholds and that its present style is not enough to stop the adversary. It may also have to reconcile to the fact that the BSP, famished though, can still play the spoilsport as it did in Azamgarh.
Ideology apart, the BJP has reshaped the paradigm of political activity in the country and has come up with a success formula which appears very simple: serious politics is a 24x7 business and cannot brook lethargy or excuses. Whether it wins or loses an election hardly matters to the party; it begins work for the next, whenever it happens.
And it coins slogans that do one too many things: project its advantages, hide its deficiencies and failures and put the Opposition always in the dock. Its latest stock campaign picture has a double engine of growth that asks the voter whether he/she wanted to hitch his/her state to the wagon powered by the Union government. It’s not a very democratic proposition but then the party has little history of following such niceties. The cumulative result is that the party’s candidates make it in the first-past-the post system.
The victory of Simranjit Singh Mann, the sympathiser of the now dead Khalistan movement, in Singur constituency in Punjab signals to the confusion in the state’s politics after two of its major players, the Siromani Akali Dal and the Congress, have pushed themselves to the margins in the border state. While the BJP is yet to discover its rhythm, the AAP, the latest entrant, has not been able to dig its heels in sufficiently deep despite winning the Assembly polls. The Punjab voter seems to be telling the AAP that it just cannot take its win in Assembly polls for granted.
The princely state ruled by the Holkars had hosted illustrious cricketers like Syed Mushtaq Ali, whose flamboyance is part of Indian cricket folklore and led by a martinet in the incomparable Col. C.K. Nayudu, India’s first Test captain. Holkar had dominated the Ranji Trophy championships in the 1940s and early ’50s, winning four titles up to the 1952-53 season.
How much the once princely state’s capital of Indore has changed over seven decades was made clear in their redrawn state of Madhya Pradesh winning their first Ranji Trophy title in 2021-22. It wasn’t so much star value and individual brilliance that saw them win the national pennant so much as their being able to put together a team of journeyman pros who play the first-class game with great commitment.
In batting Mumbai out of the game with a huge first innings lead and then meeting a modest target for a six-wicket win, Madhya Pradesh did to the 41-time Ranji champions exactly what Mumbaikars have done to opponents in their long years of glory. With the exception of the extremely talented Rajat Patidar, who grabbed an opportunity to make a name in the IPL, scoring a century in the knockouts for Royal Challengers Bangalore, they are mostly utility cricketers.
As a team they played with such dedication to a cause other than money and riches in IPL style as to pay the best possible tribute to the much-lauded coaching style of former Mumbai batsman and wicketkeeper Chandrakant Pandit. As a contracted professional, he had led MP to a Ranji summit 23 years ago when his team had taken a 75-run lead over multiple-time champion Karnataka only to be pipped at the post in the fourth innings.
Pandit, who puts diligence far above flashiness in his job as coach, is known to work wonders with players and teams willing to put in the hard yards. That teams like Vidarbha and now MP went on to win maiden titles under his tutelage in the country’s long running championship in which he has mentored six wins, tells the tale of a trainer who can impart not only knowledge and shape skills but, more importantly, teach them also how to put mind over matter. That, perhaps, is the key to sporting success of the Madhya Pradesh kind.